RTX 3500 Ada Generation Mobile vs RTX A5500 Mobile

Aggregate performance score

We've compared RTX A5500 Mobile and RTX 3500 Ada Generation Mobile, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

RTX A5500 Mobile
2022
16 GB GDDR6, 165 Watt
44.97

RTX 3500 Ada Generation Mobile outperforms RTX A5500 Mobile by a small 9% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking7762
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency18.9429.65
ArchitectureAmpere (2020−2024)Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code nameGA103no data
Market segmentMobile workstationMobile workstation
Release date22 March 2022 (2 years ago)21 March 2023 (1 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 cores74245120
Core clock speed975 MHzno data
Boost clock speed1500 MHzno data
Number of transistors22,000 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology8 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)165 Watt115 Watt (60 - 115 Watt TGP)
Texture fill rate348.0no data
Floating-point processing power22.27 TFLOPSno data
ROPs96no data
TMUs232no data
Tensor Cores232no data
Ray Tracing Cores58no 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).

Laptop sizelargelarge
InterfacePCIe 4.0 x16no 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 typeGDDR6GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount16 GB12 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit192 Bit
Memory clock speed2000 MHz16000 MHz
Memory bandwidth512.0 GB/sno data
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 Dependentno data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_2)12 Ultimate
Shader Model6.7no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL3.0no data
Vulkan1.3-
CUDA8.6-

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.

RTX A5500 Mobile 44.97
RTX 3500 Ada Generation Mobile 49.06
+9.1%

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 A5500 Mobile 17350
RTX 3500 Ada Generation Mobile 18928
+9.1%

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.

RTX A5500 Mobile 35376
RTX 3500 Ada Generation Mobile 41630
+17.7%

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.

RTX A5500 Mobile 26260
RTX 3500 Ada Generation Mobile 29248
+11.4%

3DMark Time Spy Graphics

RTX A5500 Mobile 9568
RTX 3500 Ada Generation Mobile 12806
+33.8%

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 HD131
−6.9%
140−150
+6.9%
1440p76
−5.3%
80−85
+5.3%
4K56
−7.1%
60−65
+7.1%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 129
−8.5%
140−150
+8.5%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 80−85
−7.1%
90−95
+7.1%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 65−70
−2.9%
70−75
+2.9%
Battlefield 5 120−130
−1.6%
130−140
+1.6%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 80−85
−6.3%
85−90
+6.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 114
−5.3%
120−130
+5.3%
Far Cry 5 85−90
−4.7%
90−95
+4.7%
Far Cry New Dawn 95−100
−2%
100−105
+2%
Forza Horizon 4 190−200
−4.2%
200−210
+4.2%
Hitman 3 85−90
−5.9%
90−95
+5.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn 160−170
−9.1%
180−190
+9.1%
Metro Exodus 120−130
−2.4%
130−140
+2.4%
Red Dead Redemption 2 90−95
−8.7%
100−105
+8.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 140−150
−3.4%
150−160
+3.4%
Watch Dogs: Legion 120−130
−8.5%
140−150
+8.5%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 80−85
−7.1%
90−95
+7.1%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 65−70
−2.9%
70−75
+2.9%
Battlefield 5 120−130
−1.6%
130−140
+1.6%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 80−85
−6.3%
85−90
+6.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 88
−8%
95−100
+8%
Far Cry 5 85−90
−4.7%
90−95
+4.7%
Far Cry New Dawn 95−100
−2%
100−105
+2%
Forza Horizon 4 190−200
−4.2%
200−210
+4.2%
Hitman 3 85−90
−5.9%
90−95
+5.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn 160−170
−9.1%
180−190
+9.1%
Metro Exodus 120−130
−2.4%
130−140
+2.4%
Red Dead Redemption 2 90−95
−8.7%
100−105
+8.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 200
−5%
210−220
+5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 80−85
−3.7%
85−90
+3.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion 120−130
−8.5%
140−150
+8.5%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 80−85
−7.1%
90−95
+7.1%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 65−70
−2.9%
70−75
+2.9%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 80−85
−6.3%
85−90
+6.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 76
−5.3%
80−85
+5.3%
Far Cry 5 85−90
−4.7%
90−95
+4.7%
Forza Horizon 4 190−200
−4.2%
200−210
+4.2%
Hitman 3 85−90
−5.9%
90−95
+5.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn 160−170
−9.1%
180−190
+9.1%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 178
−6.7%
190−200
+6.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 102
−7.8%
110−120
+7.8%
Watch Dogs: Legion 77
−3.9%
80−85
+3.9%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 90−95
−8.7%
100−105
+8.7%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 75−80
−5.3%
80−85
+5.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 60−65
−6.6%
65−70
+6.6%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 40−45
−4.7%
45−50
+4.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 40−45
−2.3%
45−50
+2.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 45−50
−6.4%
50−55
+6.4%
Cyberpunk 2077 45
+0%
45−50
+0%
Far Cry 5 45−50
−8.7%
50−55
+8.7%
Forza Horizon 4 220−230
−8.1%
240−250
+8.1%
Hitman 3 50−55
−7.8%
55−60
+7.8%
Horizon Zero Dawn 85−90
−4.7%
90−95
+4.7%
Metro Exodus 70−75
−8.1%
80−85
+8.1%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 129
−8.5%
140−150
+8.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 55−60
−3.4%
60−65
+3.4%
Watch Dogs: Legion 190−200
−8.8%
210−220
+8.8%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 65−70
−2.9%
70−75
+2.9%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 30−35
−6.1%
35−40
+6.1%
Hitman 3 30−35
+6.7%
30−33
−6.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 180−190
−3.8%
190−200
+3.8%
Metro Exodus 50−55
−7.8%
55−60
+7.8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 63
−3.2%
65−70
+3.2%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 24−27
−8%
27−30
+8%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 24−27
−8%
27−30
+8%
Cyberpunk 2077 18
+0%
18−20
+0%
Far Cry 5 21−24
−4.3%
24−27
+4.3%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
−9.1%
60−65
+9.1%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 68
−2.9%
70−75
+2.9%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30
+0%
30−33
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

This is how RTX A5500 Mobile and RTX 3500 Ada Generation Mobile compete in popular games:

  • RTX 3500 Ada Generation Mobile is 7% faster in 1080p
  • RTX 3500 Ada Generation Mobile is 5% faster in 1440p
  • RTX 3500 Ada Generation Mobile is 7% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 44.97 49.06
Recency 22 March 2022 21 March 2023
Maximum RAM amount 16 GB 12 GB
Chip lithography 8 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 165 Watt 115 Watt

RTX A5500 Mobile has a 33.3% higher maximum VRAM amount.

RTX 3500 Ada Generation Mobile, on the other hand, has a 9.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 months, a 60% more advanced lithography process, and 43.5% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between RTX A5500 Mobile and RTX 3500 Ada Generation Mobile.


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

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 A5500 Mobile
RTX A5500 Mobile
NVIDIA RTX 3500 Ada Generation Mobile
RTX 3500 Ada Generation Mobile

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


4.3 15 votes

Rate RTX A5500 Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
5 1 vote

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.