GeForce RTX 3080 vs GRID K160Q

Place in the ranking	954	26
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.30	46.30
Power efficiency	0.86	14.01
Architecture	Kepler (2012−2018)	Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code name	GK107	GA102
Market segment	Workstation	Desktop
Release date	28 June 2013 (11 years ago)	1 September 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$125	$699

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

RTX 3080 has 15333% better value for money than GRID K160Q.

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	192	8704
Core clock speed	850 MHz	1440 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1710 MHz
Number of transistors	1,270 million	28,300 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	130 Watt	320 Watt
Texture fill rate	13.60	465.1
Floating-point processing power	0.3264 TFLOPS	29.77 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	96
TMUs	16	272
Tensor Cores	no data	272
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	68

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x16
Length	no data	285 mm
Width	IGP	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	1x 12-pin

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory type	DDR3	GDDR6X
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	10 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	320 Bit
Memory clock speed	891 MHz	1188 MHz
Memory bandwidth	28.51 GB/s	760.3 GB/s
Shared memory	no data	-

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors	No outputs	1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort
HDMI	-	+

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX	12 (11_0)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	5.1	6.5
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	2.0
Vulkan	1.1.126	1.2
CUDA	3.0	8.5

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

GRID K160Q 1.63

RTX 3080 65.42
+3913%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

GRID K160Q 628

RTX 3080 25212
+3915%

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD	4−5 −4075%	167 +4075%
1440p	3−4 −4133%	127 +4133%
4K	2−3 −4150%	85 +4150%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	31.25	4.19
1440p	41.67	5.50
4K	62.50	8.22

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

120−130

+0%

120−130

+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	130−140 +0%	130−140 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	111 +0%	111 +0%
Battlefield 5	200−210 +0%	200−210 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	138 +0%	138 +0%
Far Cry 5	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	150−160 +0%	150−160 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	230−240 +0%	230−240 +0%
Hitman 3	116 +0%	116 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	240−250 +0%	240−250 +0%
Metro Exodus	144 +0%	144 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	131 +0%	131 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	270−280 +0%	270−280 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	248 +0%	248 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	130−140 +0%	130−140 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	96 +0%	96 +0%
Battlefield 5	200−210 +0%	200−210 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	134 +0%	134 +0%
Far Cry 5	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	150−160 +0%	150−160 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	230−240 +0%	230−240 +0%
Hitman 3	118 +0%	118 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	240−250 +0%	240−250 +0%
Metro Exodus	144 +0%	144 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	120−130 +0%	120−130 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	326 +0%	326 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	130−140 +0%	130−140 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	238 +0%	238 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	130−140 +0%	130−140 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	88 +0%	88 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	131 +0%	131 +0%
Far Cry 5	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	230−240 +0%	230−240 +0%
Hitman 3	110 +0%	110 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	182 +0%	182 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	287 +0%	287 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	149 +0%	149 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	101 +0%	101 +0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

131

+0%

131

+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	150−160 +0%	150−160 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	75−80 +0%	75−80 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	76 +0%	76 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	75−80 +0%	75−80 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	86 +0%	86 +0%
Far Cry 5	75−80 +0%	75−80 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	270−280 +0%	270−280 +0%
Hitman 3	112 +0%	112 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	151 +0%	151 +0%
Metro Exodus	107 +0%	107 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	219 +0%	219 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	247 +0%	247 +0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

130

+0%

130

+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	75−80 +0%	75−80 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%
Hitman 3	57 +0%	57 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	220−230 +0%	220−230 +0%
Metro Exodus	142 +0%	142 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	115 +0%	115 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	52 +0%	52 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	43 +0%	43 +0%
Far Cry 5	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	135 +0%	135 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	54 +0%	54 +0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

+0%

This is how GRID K160Q and RTX 3080 compete in popular games:

RTX 3080 is 4075% faster in 1080p
RTX 3080 is 4133% faster in 1440p
RTX 3080 is 4150% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 72 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	1.63	65.42
Recency	28 June 2013	1 September 2020
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	10 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	130 Watt	320 Watt

GRID K160Q has 146.2% lower power consumption.

RTX 3080, on the other hand, has a 3913.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 900% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 250% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce RTX 3080 is our recommended choice as it beats the GRID K160Q in performance tests.

Be aware that GRID K160Q is a workstation graphics card while GeForce RTX 3080 is a desktop one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.