GeForce RTX 3090 vs Quadro T2000 Mobile

Place in the ranking	268	24
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	14.95
Power efficiency	23.88	13.69
Architecture	Turing (2018−2022)	Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code name	TU117	GA102
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Desktop
Release date	27 May 2019 (5 years ago)	1 September 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$1,499

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

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 cores	1024	10496
Core clock speed	1575 MHz	1395 MHz
Boost clock speed	1785 MHz	1695 MHz
Number of transistors	4,700 million	28,300 million
Manufacturing process technology	12 nm	8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	60 Watt	350 Watt
Texture fill rate	114.2	556.0
Floating-point processing power	3.656 TFLOPS	35.58 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	112
TMUs	64	328
Tensor Cores	no data	328
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	82

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	medium sized	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x16
Length	no data	336 mm
Width	no data	3-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	1x 12-pin

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	GDDR6X
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	24 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	384 Bit
Memory clock speed	2000 MHz	1219 MHz
Memory bandwidth	128.0 GB/s	936.2 GB/s
Shared memory	-	-

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	No outputs	1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort
HDMI	-	+

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	6.5	6.5
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	2.0
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.2
CUDA	7.5	8.5

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

T2000 Mobile 20.77

RTX 3090 69.45
+234%

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.

T2000 Mobile 7985

RTX 3090 26706
+234%

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.

T2000 Mobile 13524

RTX 3090 61518
+355%

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	55−60 −258%	197 +258%
1440p	35−40 −266%	128 +266%
4K	24−27 −263%	87 +263%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	no data	7.61
1440p	no data	11.71
4K	no data	17.23

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	35−40 −495%	220 +495%
Cyberpunk 2077	40−45 −405%	207 +405%
Elden Ring	65−70 −261%	238 +261%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	65−70 −54.5%	102 +54.5%
Counter-Strike 2	35−40 −408%	188 +408%
Cyberpunk 2077	40−45 −268%	151 +268%
Forza Horizon 4	85−90 −474%	505 +474%
Metro Exodus	55−60 −202%	169 +202%
Red Dead Redemption 2	45−50 −177%	130 +177%
Valorant	80−85 −368%	393 +368%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	65−70 −77.3%	110−120 +77.3%
Counter-Strike 2	35−40 −335%	161 +335%
Cyberpunk 2077	40−45 −229%	135 +229%
Dota 2	70−75 −155%	186 +155%
Elden Ring	65−70 −350%	297 +350%
Far Cry 5	65−70 −116%	147 +116%
Fortnite	100−110 −150%	270−280 +150%
Forza Horizon 4	85−90 −357%	402 +357%
Grand Theft Auto V	70−75 −134%	171 +134%
Metro Exodus	55−60 −168%	150 +168%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	130−140 −55.8%	210−220 +55.8%
Red Dead Redemption 2	45−50 −181%	132 +181%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	65−70 −164%	170−180 +164%
Valorant	80−85 −164%	222 +164%
World of Tanks	230−240 −18.2%	270−280 +18.2%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	65−70 −43.9%	95 +43.9%
Counter-Strike 2	35−40 −295%	146 +295%
Cyberpunk 2077	40−45 −195%	121 +195%
Dota 2	70−75 −192%	213 +192%
Far Cry 5	65−70 −92.6%	130−140 +92.6%
Forza Horizon 4	85−90 −299%	351 +299%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	130−140 −55.8%	210−220 +55.8%
Valorant	80−85 −252%	296 +252%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	30−35 −355%	150 +355%
Elden Ring	35−40 −440%	189 +440%
Grand Theft Auto V	30−35 −341%	150 +341%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 −1.7%	170−180 +1.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2	18−20 −384%	92 +384%
World of Tanks	140−150 −248%	450−500 +248%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	40−45 −117%	91 +117%
Counter-Strike 2	16−18 −465%	96 +465%
Cyberpunk 2077	16−18 −412%	87 +412%
Far Cry 5	55−60 −181%	160−170 +181%
Forza Horizon 4	50−55 −393%	266 +393%
Metro Exodus	45−50 −196%	139 +196%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	27−30 −424%	152 +424%
Valorant	50−55 −446%	295 +446%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	16−18 −247%	59 +247%
Dota 2	35−40 −420%	182 +420%
Elden Ring	14−16 −600%	105 +600%
Grand Theft Auto V	35−40 −420%	182 +420%
Metro Exodus	14−16 −407%	76 +407%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	60−65 −237%	200−210 +237%
Red Dead Redemption 2	12−14 −392%	64 +392%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	35−40 −420%	182 +420%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	21−24 −333%	91 +333%
Counter-Strike 2	16−18 −406%	85−90 +406%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 −650%	45 +650%
Dota 2	35−40 −477%	202 +477%
Far Cry 5	27−30 −289%	100−110 +289%
Fortnite	24−27 −284%	95−100 +284%
Forza Horizon 4	30−35 −413%	159 +413%
Valorant	24−27 −652%	188 +652%

This is how T2000 Mobile and RTX 3090 compete in popular games:

RTX 3090 is 258% faster in 1080p
RTX 3090 is 266% faster in 1440p
RTX 3090 is 263% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

in Valorant, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the RTX 3090 is 652% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Without exception, RTX 3090 surpassed T2000 Mobile in all 63 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	20.77	69.45
Recency	27 May 2019	1 September 2020
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	24 GB
Chip lithography	12 nm	8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	60 Watt	350 Watt

T2000 Mobile has 483.3% lower power consumption.

RTX 3090, on the other hand, has a 234.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, a 500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 50% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce RTX 3090 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro T2000 Mobile in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro T2000 Mobile is a mobile workstation card while GeForce RTX 3090 is a desktop one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.