ATI Radeon 9800 vs GeForce RTX 3080

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce RTX 3080 and Radeon 9800, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

RTX 3080
2020
10 GB GDDR6X, 320 Watt
63.98
+45600%

RTX 3080 outperforms ATI 9800 by a whopping 45600% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking291432
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation46.43no data
Power efficiency14.040.27
ArchitectureAmpere (2020−2024)Rage 8 (2002−2007)
GPU code nameGA102R350
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date1 September 2020 (4 years ago)1 March 2003 (21 year 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

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 cores8704no data
Core clock speed1440 MHz325 MHz
Boost clock speed1710 MHzno data
Number of transistors28,300 million117 million
Manufacturing process technology8 nm150 nm
Power consumption (TDP)320 Watt37 Watt
Texture fill rate465.12.600
Floating-point processing power29.77 TFLOPSno data
ROPs968
TMUs2728
Tensor Cores272no data
Ray Tracing Cores68no data

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).

InterfacePCIe 4.0 x16AGP 8x
Length285 mmno data
Width2-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 12-pin1x Molex

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 typeGDDR6XDDR
Maximum RAM amount10 GB128 MB
Memory bus width320 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1188 MHz290 MHz
Memory bandwidth760.3 GB/s18.56 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 Connectors1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video
HDMI+-

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_2)9.0 (9_0)
Shader Model6.5no data
OpenGL4.62.0
OpenCL2.0N/A
Vulkan1.2N/A
CUDA8.5-
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.

RTX 3080 63.98
+45600%
ATI 9800 0.14

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.

RTX 3080 25176
+44068%
ATI 9800 57

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 HD167-0−1
1440p126-0−1
4K88-0−1

Cost per frame, $

1080p4.19no data
1440p5.55no data
4K7.94no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 307 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 150−160 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 150−160 0−1

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 239 0−1
Battlefield 5 172 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 150−160 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 138 0−1
Far Cry 5 157 0−1
Fortnite 280−290 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 230−240 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 152 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 0−1
Valorant 300−350 0−1

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 147 0−1
Battlefield 5 156 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 150−160 0−1
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 134 0−1
Dota 2 147 0−1
Far Cry 5 150 0−1
Fortnite 280−290 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 230−240 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 140 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 147 0−1
Metro Exodus 128 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 303 0−1
Valorant 300−350 0−1

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 145 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 150−160 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 131 0−1
Dota 2 135 0−1
Far Cry 5 140 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 230−240 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 149 0−1
Valorant 268 0−1

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 280−290 0−1

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 55−60 0−1
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 450−500 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 112 0−1
Metro Exodus 95 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 0−1
Valorant 350−400 0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 124 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 86 0−1
Far Cry 5 135 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 200−210 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 130−140 0−1

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 150−160 0−1

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 50−55 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 35−40 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 143 0−1
Metro Exodus 65 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 115 0−1
Valorant 300−350 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 91 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 35−40 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 43 0−1
Dota 2 129 0−1
Far Cry 5 94 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 150−160 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 95−100 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 75−80 0−1

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 63.98 0.14
Recency 1 September 2020 1 March 2003
Maximum RAM amount 10 GB 128 MB
Chip lithography 8 nm 150 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 320 Watt 37 Watt

RTX 3080 has a 45600% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 17 years, a 7900% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 1775% more advanced lithography process.

ATI 9800, on the other hand, has 764.9% lower power consumption.

The GeForce RTX 3080 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon 9800 in performance tests.

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 RTX 3080
GeForce RTX 3080
ATI Radeon 9800
Radeon 9800

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.


4.2 6474 votes

Rate GeForce RTX 3080 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 10 votes

Rate Radeon 9800 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce RTX 3080 or Radeon 9800, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.