Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile vs RTX A4500 Mobile

Aggregate performance score

We've compared RTX A4500 Mobile and RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

RTX A4500 Mobile
2022
16 GB GDDR6, 140 Watt
44.78
+64%

RTX A4500 Mobile outperforms Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile by an impressive 64% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking80211
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency21.9753.57
ArchitectureAmpere (2020−2024)Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code nameGA104AD107
Market segmentMobile workstationMobile workstation
Release date22 March 2022 (2 years ago)26 February 2024 (less than a year ago)

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 cores58882048
Core clock speed930 MHz1485 MHz
Boost clock speed1500 MHz2025 MHz
Number of transistors17,400 million18,900 million
Manufacturing process technology8 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)140 Watt35 Watt
Texture fill rate276.0129.6
Floating-point processing power17.66 TFLOPS8.294 TFLOPS
ROPs9632
TMUs18464
Tensor Cores18464
Ray Tracing Cores4616

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 sizelargemedium sized
InterfacePCIe 4.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x8

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 typeGDDR6GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount16 GB4 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed2000 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth512.0 GB/s128.0 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 ConnectorsPortable Device DependentPortable Device Dependent

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_2)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.76.8
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL3.03.0
Vulkan1.31.3
CUDA8.68.9
DLSS++

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 120−130
+69.3%
75−80
−69.3%
Counter-Strike 2 95−100
+78.2%
55−60
−78.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 95−100
+78.2%
55−60
−78.2%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 120−130
+69.3%
75−80
−69.3%
Battlefield 5 130−140
+72.5%
80−85
−72.5%
Counter-Strike 2 95−100
+78.2%
55−60
−78.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 95−100
+78.2%
55−60
−78.2%
Far Cry 5 120−130
+70.7%
75−80
−70.7%
Fortnite 170−180
+79%
100−105
−79%
Forza Horizon 4 160−170
+68.4%
95−100
−68.4%
Forza Horizon 5 120−130
+75.7%
70−75
−75.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 160−170
+69.5%
95−100
−69.5%
Valorant 230−240
+70%
140−150
−70%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 120−130
+69.3%
75−80
−69.3%
Battlefield 5 130−140
+72.5%
80−85
−72.5%
Counter-Strike 2 95−100
+78.2%
55−60
−78.2%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+73.8%
160−170
−73.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 95−100
+78.2%
55−60
−78.2%
Dota 2 140−150
+72.9%
85−90
−72.9%
Far Cry 5 120−130
+70.7%
75−80
−70.7%
Fortnite 170−180
+79%
100−105
−79%
Forza Horizon 4 160−170
+68.4%
95−100
−68.4%
Forza Horizon 5 120−130
+75.7%
70−75
−75.7%
Grand Theft Auto V 130−140
+67.5%
80−85
−67.5%
Metro Exodus 100−105
+66.7%
60−65
−66.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 160−170
+69.5%
95−100
−69.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 150−160
+66.7%
90−95
−66.7%
Valorant 230−240
+70%
140−150
−70%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 130−140
+72.5%
80−85
−72.5%
Counter-Strike 2 95−100
+78.2%
55−60
−78.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 95−100
+78.2%
55−60
−78.2%
Dota 2 140−150
+72.9%
85−90
−72.9%
Far Cry 5 120−130
+70.7%
75−80
−70.7%
Forza Horizon 4 160−170
+68.4%
95−100
−68.4%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 160−170
+69.5%
95−100
−69.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 150−160
+66.7%
90−95
−66.7%
Valorant 230−240
+70%
140−150
−70%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 170−180
+79%
100−105
−79%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+83.3%
18−20
−83.3%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 280−290
+68.8%
170−180
−68.8%
Grand Theft Auto V 85−90
+70%
50−55
−70%
Metro Exodus 60−65
+77.1%
35−40
−77.1%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+75%
100−105
−75%
Valorant 260−270
+66.9%
160−170
−66.9%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 100−110
+75%
60−65
−75%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
+66.7%
30−33
−66.7%
Far Cry 5 100−110
+68.3%
60−65
−68.3%
Forza Horizon 4 120−130
+72.9%
70−75
−72.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 80−85
+80%
45−50
−80%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 110−120
+72.3%
65−70
−72.3%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 30−35
+88.9%
18−20
−88.9%
Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+75%
12−14
−75%
Grand Theft Auto V 90−95
+69.1%
55−60
−69.1%
Metro Exodus 35−40
+81%
21−24
−81%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 65−70
+67.5%
40−45
−67.5%
Valorant 250−260
+68%
150−160
−68%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 65−70
+67.5%
40−45
−67.5%
Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+75%
12−14
−75%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+64.3%
14−16
−64.3%
Dota 2 110−120
+65.7%
70−75
−65.7%
Far Cry 5 55−60
+86.7%
30−33
−86.7%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
+80%
45−50
−80%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 55−60
+68.6%
35−40
−68.6%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 55−60
+86.7%
30−33
−86.7%

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 44.78 27.30
Recency 22 March 2022 26 February 2024
Maximum RAM amount 16 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 8 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 140 Watt 35 Watt

RTX A4500 Mobile has a 64% higher aggregate performance score, and a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount.

Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, a 60% more advanced lithography process, and 300% lower power consumption.

The RTX A4500 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile 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 RTX A4500 Mobile
RTX A4500
Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile
RTX 500 Ada Generation

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.


3.5 17 votes

Rate RTX A4500 Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 20 votes

Rate RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about RTX A4500 Mobile or RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.