RTX A2000 vs GeForce GTX 1080 Mobile
Aggregated performance score
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in performance ranking | 130 | 133 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 92.13 | 18.84 |
| Architecture | Pascal (2016−2021) | Ampere (2020−2022) |
| GPU code name | N17E-G3 | GA106 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 16 August 2016 (7 years ago) | 10 August 2021 (2 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $499.99 | $449 |
| Current price | $230 (0.5x MSRP) | $567 (1.3x MSRP) |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
GTX 1080 Mobile has 389% better value for money than RTX A2000.
Detailed specifications
General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 2560 | 3328 |
| CUDA cores | 2560 | no data |
| Core clock speed | 1607 MHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 1733 MHz | 1200 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 7,200 million | 13,250 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 16 nm | 8 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 150 Watt | 70 Watt |
| Maximum GPU temperature | 94 °C | no data |
| Texture fill rate | 283.4 | 124.8 |
| Floating-point performance | 9,068 gflops | no data |
Form factor & compatibility
Information on GeForce GTX 1080 Mobile and RTX A2000 compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.
| Laptop size | large | no data |
| Bus support | PCIe 3.0 | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 167 mm |
| Width | no data | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | None |
| SLI options | + | 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 | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 6 GB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 192 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 10 GB/s | 12 GB/s |
| Memory bandwidth | 320 GB/s | 288.0 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 | DP 1.42, HDMI 2.0b, DL-DVI | 4x mini-DisplayPort |
| Multi monitor support | + | no data |
| G-SYNC support | + | no data |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| GPU Boost | 3.0 | no data |
| VR Ready | + | no data |
| Ansel | + | no data |
API compatibility
List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | 6.6 |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | 1.2 |
| CUDA | + | 8.6 |
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 | 115
+4.5%
| 110−120
−4.5%
|
| 1440p | 71
+1.4%
| 70−75
−1.4%
|
| 4K | 54
+8%
| 50−55
−8%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 60−65
+3.3%
|
60−65
−3.3%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 59
+7.3%
|
55−60
−7.3%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 78
+4%
|
75−80
−4%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 115
+4.5%
|
110−120
−4.5%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 133
+2.3%
|
130−140
−2.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 60−65
+3.3%
|
60−65
−3.3%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 91
+1.1%
|
90−95
−1.1%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 89
+4.7%
|
85−90
−4.7%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 108
+8%
|
100−105
−8%
|
| Hitman 3 | 110−120
+2.7%
|
110−120
−2.7%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 84
+5%
|
80−85
−5%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 91
+1.1%
|
90−95
−1.1%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 84
+5%
|
80−85
−5%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 77
+2.7%
|
75−80
−2.7%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 52
+4%
|
50−55
−4%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 68
+4.6%
|
65−70
−4.6%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 112
+1.8%
|
110−120
−1.8%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 110
+10%
|
100−105
−10%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 60−65
+3.3%
|
60−65
−3.3%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 117
+6.4%
|
110−120
−6.4%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 85
+6.3%
|
80−85
−6.3%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 106
+6%
|
100−105
−6%
|
| Hitman 3 | 110−120
+2.7%
|
110−120
−2.7%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 68
+4.6%
|
65−70
−4.6%
|
| Metro Exodus | 73
+4.3%
|
70−75
−4.3%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 51
+2%
|
50−55
−2%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 83
+3.8%
|
80−85
−3.8%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 142
+1.4%
|
140−150
−1.4%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 68
+4.6%
|
65−70
−4.6%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 53
+6%
|
50−55
−6%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 59
+7.3%
|
55−60
−7.3%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 102
+2%
|
100−105
−2%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 60−65
+3.3%
|
60−65
−3.3%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 108
+8%
|
100−105
−8%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 77
+2.7%
|
75−80
−2.7%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 102
+2%
|
100−105
−2%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 74
+5.7%
|
70−75
−5.7%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 51
+2%
|
50−55
−2%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 74
+5.7%
|
70−75
−5.7%
|
| Hitman 3 | 65−70
+8.3%
|
60−65
−8.3%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 49
+8.9%
|
45−50
−8.9%
|
| Metro Exodus | 44
+10%
|
40−45
−10%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 32
+6.7%
|
30−33
−6.7%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 62
+3.3%
|
60−65
−3.3%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 42
+5%
|
40−45
−5%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 46
+2.2%
|
45−50
−2.2%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 86
+1.2%
|
85−90
−1.2%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 27−30
+12.5%
|
24−27
−12.5%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 74
+5.7%
|
70−75
−5.7%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 74
+5.7%
|
70−75
−5.7%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 87
+2.4%
|
85−90
−2.4%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 45−50
+8.9%
|
45−50
−8.9%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 37
+5.7%
|
35−40
−5.7%
|
4K
High Preset
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 40
+14.3%
|
35−40
−14.3%
|
| Hitman 3 | 35−40
+16.7%
|
30−33
−16.7%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 14
+16.7%
|
12−14
−16.7%
|
| Metro Exodus | 27
+12.5%
|
24−27
−12.5%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 20
+11.1%
|
18−20
−11.1%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 31
+3.3%
|
30−33
−3.3%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 51
+2%
|
50−55
−2%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 31
+3.3%
|
30−33
−3.3%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 27
+12.5%
|
24−27
−12.5%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 52
+4%
|
50−55
−4%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−12
+10%
|
10−11
−10%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 40
+14.3%
|
35−40
−14.3%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 45
+12.5%
|
40−45
−12.5%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 61
+1.7%
|
60−65
−1.7%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 21
+16.7%
|
18−20
−16.7%
|
This is how GTX 1080 Mobile and RTX A2000 compete in popular games:
- GTX 1080 Mobile is 5% faster in 1080p
- GTX 1080 Mobile is 1% faster in 1440p
- GTX 1080 Mobile is 8% faster in 4K
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 35.73 | 35.59 |
| Recency | 16 August 2016 | 10 August 2021 |
| Cost | $499.99 | $449 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 6 GB |
| Chip lithography | 16 nm | 8 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 150 Watt | 70 Watt |
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between GeForce GTX 1080 Mobile and RTX A2000.
Be aware that GeForce GTX 1080 Mobile is a notebook card while RTX A2000 is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Comparisons with similar GPUs
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
