RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell SFF vs RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell Mobile

Aggregate performance score

We've compared RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell Mobile with RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell SFF, including specs and performance data.

RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell Mobile
2025
8 GB GDDR7, 45 Watt
33.61

RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell SFF outperforms RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell Mobile by a whopping 102% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking15819
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency60.4978.58
ArchitectureBlackwell 2.0 (2025−2026)Blackwell 2.0 (2025−2026)
GPU code nameGB206GB203
Market segmentMobile workstationWorkstation
Release date19 March 2025 (less than a year ago)11 August 2025 (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 cores33288960
Core clock speed952 MHz790 MHz
Boost clock speed1455 MHz1337 MHz
Number of transistorsno data45,600 million
Manufacturing process technology5 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)45 Watt70 Watt
Texture fill rate151.3374.4
Floating-point processing power9.684 TFLOPS23.96 TFLOPS
ROPs3296
TMUs104280
Tensor Cores104280
Ray Tracing Cores2670
L1 Cache3.3 MB8.8 MB
L2 Cache32 MB48 MB

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 5.0 x16PCIe 5.0 x8
Lengthno data167 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeGDDR7GDDR7
Maximum RAM amount8 GB24 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit192 Bit
Memory clock speed1750 MHz1125 MHz
Memory bandwidth448.0 GB/s432.0 GB/s
Shared memory--
Resizable BAR++

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display ConnectorsPortable Device Dependent4x mini-DisplayPort 2.1b

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_2)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.86.8
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL3.03.0
Vulkan1.41.4
CUDA12.012.0
DLSS++

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 HD130
−100%
260−270
+100%
1440p69
−88.4%
130−140
+88.4%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 200−210
−100%
400−450
+100%
Cyberpunk 2077 80−85
−92.8%
160−170
+92.8%
Hogwarts Legacy 80−85
−95.1%
160−170
+95.1%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 120−130
−98.4%
250−260
+98.4%
Counter-Strike 2 200−210
−100%
400−450
+100%
Cyberpunk 2077 80−85
−92.8%
160−170
+92.8%
Far Cry 5 110−120
−100%
230−240
+100%
Fortnite 150−160
−89.9%
300−310
+89.9%
Forza Horizon 4 130−140
−101%
280−290
+101%
Forza Horizon 5 110−120
−94.7%
220−230
+94.7%
Hogwarts Legacy 80−85
−95.1%
160−170
+95.1%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 140−150
−95.8%
280−290
+95.8%
Valorant 210−220
−86.9%
400−450
+86.9%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 120−130
−98.4%
250−260
+98.4%
Counter-Strike 2 200−210
−100%
400−450
+100%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
−97.8%
550−600
+97.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 80−85
−92.8%
160−170
+92.8%
Far Cry 5 110−120
−100%
230−240
+100%
Fortnite 150−160
−89.9%
300−310
+89.9%
Forza Horizon 4 130−140
−101%
280−290
+101%
Forza Horizon 5 110−120
−94.7%
220−230
+94.7%
Grand Theft Auto V 145
−100%
290−300
+100%
Hogwarts Legacy 80−85
−95.1%
160−170
+95.1%
Metro Exodus 85−90
−100%
170−180
+100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 140−150
−95.8%
280−290
+95.8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 120−130
−95.1%
240−250
+95.1%
Valorant 210−220
−86.9%
400−450
+86.9%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 120−130
−98.4%
250−260
+98.4%
Cyberpunk 2077 80−85
−92.8%
160−170
+92.8%
Far Cry 5 110−120
−100%
230−240
+100%
Forza Horizon 4 130−140
−101%
280−290
+101%
Hogwarts Legacy 80−85
−95.1%
160−170
+95.1%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 140−150
−95.8%
280−290
+95.8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 120−130
−95.1%
240−250
+95.1%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 150−160
−89.9%
300−310
+89.9%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 85−90
−93.2%
170−180
+93.2%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 250−260
−99.2%
500−550
+99.2%
Grand Theft Auto V 88
−93.2%
170−180
+93.2%
Metro Exodus 50−55
−92.3%
100−105
+92.3%
Valorant 240−250
−82.2%
450−500
+82.2%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 90−95
−93.5%
180−190
+93.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
−95.1%
80−85
+95.1%
Far Cry 5 85−90
−97.7%
170−180
+97.7%
Forza Horizon 4 100−105
−100%
200−210
+100%
Hogwarts Legacy 40−45
−90.5%
80−85
+90.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 65−70
−97%
130−140
+97%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 90−95
−93.5%
180−190
+93.5%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 40−45
−100%
80−85
+100%
Grand Theft Auto V 75−80
−97.4%
150−160
+97.4%
Metro Exodus 30−35
−87.5%
60−65
+87.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 55−60
−96.4%
110−120
+96.4%
Valorant 210−220
−82.6%
400−450
+82.6%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 55−60
−93%
110−120
+93%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
−94.4%
35−40
+94.4%
Far Cry 5 45−50
−95.7%
90−95
+95.7%
Forza Horizon 4 65−70
−94%
130−140
+94%
Hogwarts Legacy 21−24
−95.7%
45−50
+95.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
−95.7%
90−95
+95.7%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 45−50
−100%
90−95
+100%

This is how RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell Mobile and RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell SFF compete in popular games:

  • RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell SFF is 100% faster in 1080p
  • RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell SFF is 88% faster in 1440p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 33.61 67.91
Recency 19 March 2025 11 August 2025
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 24 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 45 Watt 70 Watt

RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell Mobile has 55.6% lower power consumption.

RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell SFF, on the other hand, has a 102.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 months, and a 200% higher maximum VRAM amount.

The RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell SFF is our recommended choice as it beats the RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell Mobile in performance tests.

Be aware that RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell Mobile is a mobile workstation graphics card while RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell SFF is a 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 RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell Mobile
RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell Mobile
NVIDIA RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell SFF
RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell SFF

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 1 vote

Rate RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell SFF on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about RTX PRO 2000 Blackwell Mobile or RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell SFF, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.