RTX A2000 Mobile vs GRID M40

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GRID M40 with RTX A2000 Mobile, including specs and performance data.

GRID M40
2016
8 GB GDDR5, 50 Watt
4.43

RTX A2000 Mobile outperforms GRID M40 by a whopping 479% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking678222
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency6.0718.52
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2017)Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code nameGM107GA106
Market segmentWorkstationMobile workstation
Release date18 May 2016 (8 years ago)12 April 2021 (3 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 cores3842560
Core clock speed1033 MHz893 MHz
Boost clock speed1000 MHz1358 MHz
Number of transistors1,870 million13,250 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)50 Watt95 Watt
Texture fill rate33.06108.6
Floating-point processing power0.7933 TFLOPS6.953 TFLOPS
ROPs1648
TMUs3280
Tensor Coresno data80
Ray Tracing Coresno data20

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 sizeno datalarge
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Width2-slotno 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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount8 GB4 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1300 MHz1375 MHz
Memory bandwidth83.2 GB/s176.0 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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.16.6
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.23.0
Vulkan1.1.1261.2
CUDA5.08.6
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 HD12−14
−558%
79
+558%
1440p7−8
−500%
42
+500%
4K6−7
−517%
37
+517%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 74
+0%
74
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Battlefield 5 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 62
+0%
62
+0%
Far Cry 5 96
+0%
96
+0%
Fortnite 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Valorant 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Battlefield 5 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 250−260
+0%
250−260
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 50
+0%
50
+0%
Dota 2 145
+0%
145
+0%
Far Cry 5 88
+0%
88
+0%
Fortnite 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 106
+0%
106
+0%
Metro Exodus 44
+0%
44
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 96
+0%
96
+0%
Valorant 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 41
+0%
41
+0%
Dota 2 129
+0%
129
+0%
Far Cry 5 83
+0%
83
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 50
+0%
50
+0%
Valorant 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 50
+0%
50
+0%
Metro Exodus 27
+0%
27
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 25
+0%
25
+0%
Far Cry 5 53
+0%
53
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 44
+0%
44
+0%
Metro Exodus 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 33
+0%
33
+0%
Valorant 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Dota 2 72
+0%
72
+0%
Far Cry 5 26
+0%
26
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

This is how GRID M40 and RTX A2000 Mobile compete in popular games:

  • RTX A2000 Mobile is 558% faster in 1080p
  • RTX A2000 Mobile is 500% faster in 1440p
  • RTX A2000 Mobile is 517% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 67 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 4.43 25.66
Recency 18 May 2016 12 April 2021
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 8 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 50 Watt 95 Watt

GRID M40 has a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and 90% lower power consumption.

RTX A2000 Mobile, on the other hand, has a 479.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, and a 250% more advanced lithography process.

The RTX A2000 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the GRID M40 in performance tests.

Be aware that GRID M40 is a workstation card while RTX A2000 Mobile is a mobile 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 GRID M40
GRID M40
NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile
RTX A2000

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.


3.1 8 votes

Rate GRID M40 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 104 votes

Rate RTX A2000 Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GRID M40 or RTX A2000 Mobile, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.