RTX 3500 Ada Generation Mobile vs GeForce GTX 780 Ti

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 780 Ti with RTX 3500 Ada Generation Mobile, including specs and performance data.

GTX 780 Ti
2013
3 GB GDDR5, 250 Watt
23.45

RTX 3500 Ada Generation Mobile outperforms GTX 780 Ti by a whopping 109% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking26279
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation5.60no data
Power efficiency6.7835.39
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code nameGK110BAD104
Market segmentDesktopMobile workstation
Release date7 November 2013 (11 years ago)21 March 2023 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$699 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

no data

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 cores28805120
Core clock speed875 MHz1110 MHz
Boost clock speed928 MHz1545 MHz
Number of transistors7,080 million35,800 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Watt100 Watt
Texture fill rate222.7247.2
Floating-point processing power5.345 TFLOPS15.82 TFLOPS
ROPs4864
TMUs240160
Tensor Coresno data160
Ray Tracing Coresno data40

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
Bus supportPCI Express 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Length267 mmno data
Height4.376" (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pinno data
SLI options+-

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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount3 GB12 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit192 Bit
Memory clock speed7.0 GB/s2250 MHz
Memory bandwidth336 GB/s432.0 GB/s
Shared memory--
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 ConnectorsOne Dual Link DVI-I, One Dual Link DVI-D, One HDMI, One DisplayPortPortable Device Dependent
Multi monitor support4 displaysno data
HDMI+-
HDCP+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIInternalno data

Supported technologies

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

Blu Ray 3D+-
3D Gaming+-
3D Vision+-
3D Vision Live+-

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.16.8
OpenGL4.44.6
OpenCL1.23.0
Vulkan1.1.1261.3
CUDA+8.9
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.

GTX 780 Ti 23.45
RTX 3500 Ada Generation Mobile 48.98
+109%

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.

GTX 780 Ti 9460
RTX 3500 Ada Generation Mobile 19759
+109%

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

GTX 780 Ti 15619
RTX 3500 Ada Generation Mobile 41630
+167%

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.

GTX 780 Ti 11812
RTX 3500 Ada Generation Mobile 29248
+148%

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 HD96
−108%
200−210
+108%

Cost per frame, $

1080p7.28no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 130−140
−105%
270−280
+105%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
−100%
100−105
+100%
Dead Island 2 95−100
−108%
200−210
+108%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 90−95
−107%
190−200
+107%
Counter-Strike 2 130−140
−105%
270−280
+105%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
−100%
100−105
+100%
Dead Island 2 95−100
−108%
200−210
+108%
Far Cry 5 75−80
−97.4%
150−160
+97.4%
Fortnite 110−120
−109%
240−250
+109%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
−107%
190−200
+107%
Forza Horizon 5 70−75
−108%
150−160
+108%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 90−95
−100%
180−190
+100%
Valorant 160−170
−86.3%
300−310
+86.3%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 90−95
−107%
190−200
+107%
Counter-Strike 2 130−140
−105%
270−280
+105%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 250−260
−97.6%
500−550
+97.6%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
−100%
100−105
+100%
Dead Island 2 95−100
−108%
200−210
+108%
Dota 2 120−130
−108%
250−260
+108%
Far Cry 5 75−80
−97.4%
150−160
+97.4%
Fortnite 110−120
−109%
240−250
+109%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
−107%
190−200
+107%
Forza Horizon 5 70−75
−108%
150−160
+108%
Grand Theft Auto V 80−85
−102%
170−180
+102%
Metro Exodus 50−55
−100%
100−105
+100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 90−95
−100%
180−190
+100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 65−70
−106%
140−150
+106%
Valorant 160−170
−86.3%
300−310
+86.3%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 90−95
−107%
190−200
+107%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
−100%
100−105
+100%
Dead Island 2 95−100
−108%
200−210
+108%
Dota 2 120−130
−108%
250−260
+108%
Far Cry 5 75−80
−97.4%
150−160
+97.4%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
−107%
190−200
+107%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 90−95
−100%
180−190
+100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 65−70
−106%
140−150
+106%
Valorant 160−170
−86.3%
300−310
+86.3%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 110−120
−109%
240−250
+109%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 50−55
−100%
100−105
+100%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 160−170
−82.9%
300−310
+82.9%
Grand Theft Auto V 40−45
−107%
85−90
+107%
Metro Exodus 30−35
−93.5%
60−65
+93.5%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
−100%
350−400
+100%
Valorant 200−210
−100%
400−450
+100%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 65−70
−100%
130−140
+100%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
−95.7%
45−50
+95.7%
Dead Island 2 40−45
−102%
85−90
+102%
Far Cry 5 50−55
−108%
110−120
+108%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
−103%
120−130
+103%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
−97.4%
75−80
+97.4%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 55−60
−100%
110−120
+100%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 21−24
−105%
45−50
+105%
Dead Island 2 21−24
−105%
45−50
+105%
Grand Theft Auto V 40−45
−97.7%
85−90
+97.7%
Metro Exodus 18−20
−84.2%
35−40
+84.2%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
−106%
70−75
+106%
Valorant 130−140
−101%
270−280
+101%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
−100%
70−75
+100%
Counter-Strike 2 21−24
−105%
45−50
+105%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
−80%
18−20
+80%
Dead Island 2 21−24
−105%
45−50
+105%
Dota 2 75−80
−97.4%
150−160
+97.4%
Far Cry 5 27−30
−104%
55−60
+104%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
−107%
85−90
+107%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
−108%
50−55
+108%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 24−27
−100%
50−55
+100%

This is how GTX 780 Ti and RTX 3500 Ada Generation Mobile compete in popular games:

  • RTX 3500 Ada Generation Mobile is 108% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 23.45 48.98
Recency 7 November 2013 21 March 2023
Maximum RAM amount 3 GB 12 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 250 Watt 100 Watt

RTX 3500 Ada Generation Mobile has a 108.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 460% more advanced lithography process, and 150% lower power consumption.

The RTX 3500 Ada Generation Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 780 Ti in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 780 Ti is a desktop graphics card while RTX 3500 Ada Generation Mobile is a mobile workstation 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 GTX 780 Ti
GeForce GTX 780 Ti
NVIDIA RTX 3500 Ada Generation Mobile
RTX 3500 Ada Generation Mobile

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.


4 691 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 780 Ti on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.8 11 votes

Rate RTX 3500 Ada Generation Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GTX 780 Ti or RTX 3500 Ada Generation Mobile, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.