GeForce RTX 5080 Mobile vs GT 440
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce GT 440 with GeForce RTX 5080 Mobile, including specs and performance data.
RTX 5080 Mobile outperforms GT 440 by a whopping 3483% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 933 | 24 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.08 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 2.15 | 62.47 |
| Architecture | Fermi (2010−2014) | Blackwell 2.0 (2025) |
| GPU code name | GF108 | GB203 |
| Market segment | Desktop | Laptop |
| Release date | 1 February 2011 (14 years ago) | 2 April 2025 (less than a year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $79 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.
Performance to price scatter graph
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 | 96 | 7680 |
| Core clock speed | 810 MHz | 975 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 1500 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 585 million | 45,600 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 80 Watt |
| Maximum GPU temperature | 98 °C | no data |
| Texture fill rate | 12.96 | 360.0 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.311 TFLOPS | 23.04 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 4 | 96 |
| TMUs | 16 | 240 |
| Tensor Cores | no data | 240 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 60 |
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 size | no data | large |
| Bus support | PCI-E 2.0 x 16 | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 5.0 x16 |
| Length | 145 mm | no data |
| Height | 4.376" (11.1 cm) | no data |
| Width | 1-slot | no data |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | no 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 type | DDR3 | GDDR7 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB GDDR5 or 1 GB | 16 GB |
| Standard memory config per GPU | 1 GB GDDR5 or 2 GB | no data |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1600 MHz (GDDR5) or 900 MHz (DDR3) | 1750 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 28.8 (DDR3) – 51.2 (GDDR5) | 896.0 GB/s |
| Shared memory | no data | - |
| Resizable BAR | - | + |
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 | HDMIVGADual Link DVI | Portable Device Dependent |
| Multi monitor support | + | no data |
| HDMI | + | - |
| Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | no data |
| Audio input for HDMI | Internal | no data |
API and SDK 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 | 6.8 |
| OpenGL | 4.2 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.4 |
| CUDA | + | 12.0 |
| DLSS | - | + |
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.
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.
3DMark Fire Strike Graphics
Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.
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
−3825%
| 157
+3825%
|
| 1440p | 2−3
−5150%
| 105
+5150%
|
| 4K | 2−3
−3550%
| 73
+3550%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | 19.75 | no data |
| 1440p | 39.50 | no data |
| 4K | 39.50 | no data |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 300−350
+0%
|
300−350
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 160−170
+0%
|
160−170
+0%
|
| Sons of the Forest | 120−130
+0%
|
120−130
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 170−180
+0%
|
170−180
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 345
+0%
|
345
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 160−170
+0%
|
160−170
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 190−200
+0%
|
190−200
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 300−350
+0%
|
300−350
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 260−270
+0%
|
260−270
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 190−200
+0%
|
190−200
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 170−180
+0%
|
170−180
+0%
|
| Sons of the Forest | 120−130
+0%
|
120−130
+0%
|
| Valorant | 350−400
+0%
|
350−400
+0%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 170−180
+0%
|
170−180
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 273
+0%
|
273
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 270−280
+0%
|
270−280
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 160−170
+0%
|
160−170
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 190−200
+0%
|
190−200
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 300−350
+0%
|
300−350
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 260−270
+0%
|
260−270
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 190−200
+0%
|
190−200
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 170
+0%
|
170
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 170−180
+0%
|
170−180
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 170−180
+0%
|
170−180
+0%
|
| Sons of the Forest | 120−130
+0%
|
120−130
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 280−290
+0%
|
280−290
+0%
|
| Valorant | 350−400
+0%
|
350−400
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 170−180
+0%
|
170−180
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 160−170
+0%
|
160−170
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 190−200
+0%
|
190−200
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 260−270
+0%
|
260−270
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 170−180
+0%
|
170−180
+0%
|
| Sons of the Forest | 120−130
+0%
|
120−130
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 203
+0%
|
203
+0%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 300−350
+0%
|
300−350
+0%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 205
+0%
|
205
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 500−550
+0%
|
500−550
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 152
+0%
|
152
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 110−120
+0%
|
110−120
+0%
|
| Valorant | 450−500
+0%
|
450−500
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 170−180
+0%
|
170−180
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 95−100
+0%
|
95−100
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 170−180
+0%
|
170−180
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 230−240
+0%
|
230−240
+0%
|
| Sons of the Forest | 100−110
+0%
|
100−110
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 160−170
+0%
|
160−170
+0%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 150−160
+0%
|
150−160
+0%
|
4K
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 90−95
+0%
|
90−95
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 178
+0%
|
178
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 75−80
+0%
|
75−80
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 140−150
+0%
|
140−150
+0%
|
| Valorant | 300−350
+0%
|
300−350
+0%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 120−130
+0%
|
120−130
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 45−50
+0%
|
45−50
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 110−120
+0%
|
110−120
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 180−190
+0%
|
180−190
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 95−100
+0%
|
95−100
+0%
|
| Sons of the Forest | 75−80
+0%
|
75−80
+0%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 75−80
+0%
|
75−80
+0%
|
This is how GT 440 and RTX 5080 Mobile compete in popular games:
- RTX 5080 Mobile is 3825% faster in 1080p
- RTX 5080 Mobile is 5150% faster in 1440p
- RTX 5080 Mobile is 3550% faster in 4K
All in all, in popular games:
- there's a draw in 59 tests (100%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.84 | 65.93 |
| Recency | 1 February 2011 | 2 April 2025 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB GDDR5 or 1 GB | 16 GB |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 80 Watt |
GT 440 has a 3100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and 23.1% lower power consumption.
RTX 5080 Mobile, on the other hand, has a 3483.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 14 years, and a 700% more advanced lithography process.
The GeForce RTX 5080 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 440 in performance tests.
Be aware that GeForce GT 440 is a desktop graphics card while GeForce RTX 5080 Mobile is a notebook one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
