RTX A3000 Mobile vs Radeon R5 A240
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon R5 A240 with RTX A3000 Mobile, including specs and performance data.
RTX A3000 Mobile outperforms R5 A240 by a whopping 2116% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1042 | 206 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 2.11 | 33.36 |
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 (2012−2020) | Ampere (2020−2025) |
| GPU code name | Oland | GA104 |
| Market segment | Desktop | Mobile workstation |
| Release date | 2014 (11 years ago) | 12 April 2021 (4 years 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 cores | 320 | 4096 |
| Core clock speed | 1030 MHz | 600 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 780 MHz | 1230 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 950 million | 17,400 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 8 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 50 Watt | 70 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 15.60 | 157.4 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 10.08 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 8 | 64 |
| TMUs | 20 | 128 |
| Tensor Cores | no data | 128 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 32 |
| L1 Cache | no data | 4 MB |
| L2 Cache | no data | 4 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).
| Laptop size | no data | large |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |
| Length | 168 mm | no data |
| Width | 1-slot | no data |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | no 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 type | DDR3 | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 6 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 192 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1800 MBps | 1375 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 28.8 GB/s | 264.0 GB/s |
| Shared memory | no data | - |
| 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 Connectors | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, 1x VGA | Portable Device Dependent |
| HDMI | + | - |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (11_1) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 6.5 (5.1) | 6.8 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 2.1 (1.2) | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.170 | 1.3 |
| CUDA | - | 8.6 |
| DLSS | - | + |
Synthetic benchmarks
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.
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.
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 | 4−5
−2425%
| 101
+2425%
|
| 1440p | 2−3
−2400%
| 50
+2400%
|
| 4K | 2−3
−2150%
| 45
+2150%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 170−180
+0%
|
170−180
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 77
+0%
|
77
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 110−120
+0%
|
110−120
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 170−180
+0%
|
170−180
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 66
+0%
|
66
+0%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 110−120
+0%
|
110−120
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 111
+0%
|
111
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 140−150
+0%
|
140−150
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 120−130
+0%
|
120−130
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 95−100
+0%
|
95−100
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 120−130
+0%
|
120−130
+0%
|
| Valorant | 190−200
+0%
|
190−200
+0%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 110−120
+0%
|
110−120
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 170−180
+0%
|
170−180
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 270−280
+0%
|
270−280
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 53
+0%
|
53
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 142
+0%
|
142
+0%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 110−120
+0%
|
110−120
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 103
+0%
|
103
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 140−150
+0%
|
140−150
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 120−130
+0%
|
120−130
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 95−100
+0%
|
95−100
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 124
+0%
|
124
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 70−75
+0%
|
70−75
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 120−130
+0%
|
120−130
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 151
+0%
|
151
+0%
|
| Valorant | 190−200
+0%
|
190−200
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 110−120
+0%
|
110−120
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 43
+0%
|
43
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 132
+0%
|
132
+0%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 110−120
+0%
|
110−120
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 93
+0%
|
93
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 120−130
+0%
|
120−130
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 120−130
+0%
|
120−130
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 61
+0%
|
61
+0%
|
| Valorant | 190−200
+0%
|
190−200
+0%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 140−150
+0%
|
140−150
+0%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 70−75
+0%
|
70−75
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 210−220
+0%
|
210−220
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 62
+0%
|
62
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 40−45
+0%
|
40−45
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 170−180
+0%
|
170−180
+0%
|
| Valorant | 230−240
+0%
|
230−240
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 80−85
+0%
|
80−85
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 27
+0%
|
27
+0%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 70−75
+0%
|
70−75
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 69
+0%
|
69
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 80−85
+0%
|
80−85
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 50−55
+0%
|
50−55
+0%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 75−80
+0%
|
75−80
+0%
|
4K
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 49
+0%
|
49
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 27−30
+0%
|
27−30
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 45
+0%
|
45
+0%
|
| Valorant | 180−190
+0%
|
180−190
+0%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 45−50
+0%
|
45−50
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 77
+0%
|
77
+0%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 35−40
+0%
|
35−40
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 36
+0%
|
36
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 55−60
+0%
|
55−60
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 35−40
+0%
|
35−40
+0%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 35−40
+0%
|
35−40
+0%
|
This is how R5 A240 and RTX A3000 Mobile compete in popular games:
- RTX A3000 Mobile is 2425% faster in 1080p
- RTX A3000 Mobile is 2400% faster in 1440p
- RTX A3000 Mobile is 2150% faster in 4K
All in all, in popular games:
- there's a draw in 64 tests (100%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.36 | 30.14 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 6 GB |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 8 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 50 Watt | 70 Watt |
R5 A240 has 40% lower power consumption.
RTX A3000 Mobile, on the other hand, has a 2116.2% higher aggregate performance score, a 200% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 250% more advanced lithography process.
The RTX A3000 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R5 A240 in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon R5 A240 is a desktop graphics card while RTX A3000 Mobile is a mobile workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
