GeForce RTX 2080 Super Mobile vs FX 5600

#ad 
Buy
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce FX 5600 with GeForce RTX 2080 Super Mobile, including specs and performance data.

FX 5600
2003
128 MB DDR, 37 Watt
0.03

RTX 2080 Super Mobile outperforms FX 5600 by a whopping 112933% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking1498122
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency0.0617.86
ArchitectureRankine (2003−2005)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameNV31TU104
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date6 March 2003 (22 years ago)2 April 2020 (4 years ago)

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 coresno data3072
Core clock speed325 MHz1365 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1560 MHz
Number of transistors80 million13,600 million
Manufacturing process technology130 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)37 Watt150 Watt
Texture fill rate1.300299.5
Floating-point processing powerno data9.585 TFLOPS
ROPs464
TMUs4192
Tensor Coresno data384
Ray Tracing Coresno data48

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).

Laptop sizeno datalarge
InterfaceAGP 8xPCIe 3.0 x16
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data

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 typeDDRGDDR6
Maximum RAM amount128 MB8 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed250 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth8 GB/s448.0 GB/s
Shared memoryno 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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-VideoNo outputs
G-SYNC support-+

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

VR Readyno data+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX9.0a12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Modelno data6.5
OpenGL1.5 (2.1)4.6
OpenCLN/A1.2
VulkanN/A1.2.140
CUDA-7.5
DLSS-+

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-0−1137
1440p-0−195
4K-0−165

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Battlefield 5 169
+0%
169
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Far Cry 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Fortnite 178
+0%
178
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Valorant 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Battlefield 5 161
+0%
161
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Dota 2 153
+0%
153
+0%
Far Cry 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Fortnite 171
+0%
171
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 136
+0%
136
+0%
Metro Exodus 92
+0%
92
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 198
+0%
198
+0%
Valorant 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 147
+0%
147
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Dota 2 141
+0%
141
+0%
Far Cry 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 103
+0%
103
+0%
Valorant 205
+0%
205
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 136
+0%
136
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 250−260
+0%
250−260
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 90
+0%
90
+0%
Metro Exodus 55
+0%
55
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 240−250
+0%
240−250
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 121
+0%
121
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Far Cry 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 104
+0%
104
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 97
+0%
97
+0%
Metro Exodus 35
+0%
35
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 76
+0%
76
+0%
Valorant 220−230
+0%
220−230
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 72
+0%
72
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Dota 2 141
+0%
141
+0%
Far Cry 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 52
+0%
52
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 63 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.03 33.91
Recency 6 March 2003 2 April 2020
Maximum RAM amount 128 MB 8 GB
Chip lithography 130 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 37 Watt 150 Watt

FX 5600 has 305.4% lower power consumption.

RTX 2080 Super Mobile, on the other hand, has a 112933.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 17 years, a 6300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 983.3% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce RTX 2080 Super Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce FX 5600 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce FX 5600 is a desktop card while GeForce RTX 2080 Super Mobile is a notebook one.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce FX 5600
GeForce FX 5600
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Super Mobile
GeForce RTX 2080 Super

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.2 71 vote

Rate GeForce FX 5600 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2 133 votes

Rate GeForce RTX 2080 Super Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce FX 5600 or GeForce RTX 2080 Super Mobile, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.