GeForce RTX 3080 Mobile vs 7950 GX2

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce 7950 GX2 with GeForce RTX 3080 Mobile, including specs and performance data.

7950 GX2
2006
512 MB GDDR3, 110 Watt
0.52

RTX 3080 Mobile outperforms 7950 GX2 by a whopping 8133% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking123091
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency0.3325.63
ArchitectureCurie (2003−2013)Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code nameG71GA104
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date5 June 2006 (18 years ago)12 January 2021 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$599 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 coresno data6144
Core clock speed500 MHz1110 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1545 MHz
Number of transistors278 million17,400 million
Manufacturing process technology90 nm8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)110 Watt115 Watt
Texture fill rate12.00296.6
Floating-point processing powerno data18.98 TFLOPS
ROPs1696
TMUs24192
Tensor Coresno data192
Ray Tracing Coresno data48

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 1.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Length270 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pinno 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 typeGDDR3GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount512 MB8 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed600 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth38.4 GB/s448.0 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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x S-VideoNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX9.0c (9_3)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model3.06.5
OpenGL2.14.6
OpenCLN/A2.0
VulkanN/A1.2
CUDA-8.6

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.

7950 GX2 0.52
RTX 3080 Mobile 42.81
+8133%

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.

7950 GX2 201
RTX 3080 Mobile 16457
+8088%

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 HD1−2
−11900%
120
+11900%
1440p0−173
4K0−146

Cost per frame, $

1080p599.00no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 103
+0%
103
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 134
+0%
134
+0%
Elden Ring 132
+0%
132
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 100
+0%
100
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 108
+0%
108
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 261
+0%
261
+0%
Metro Exodus 108
+0%
108
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Valorant 198
+0%
198
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 86
+0%
86
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 90
+0%
90
+0%
Dota 2 132
+0%
132
+0%
Elden Ring 204
+0%
204
+0%
Far Cry 5 83
+0%
83
+0%
Fortnite 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 213
+0%
213
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 131
+0%
131
+0%
Metro Exodus 91
+0%
91
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 74
+0%
74
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Valorant 111
+0%
111
+0%
World of Tanks 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 75
+0%
75
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 80
+0%
80
+0%
Dota 2 128
+0%
128
+0%
Far Cry 5 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 185
+0%
185
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%
Valorant 179
+0%
179
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 94
+0%
94
+0%
Elden Ring 111
+0%
111
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 94
+0%
94
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 49
+0%
49
+0%
World of Tanks 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 47
+0%
47
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 21
+0%
21
+0%
Far Cry 5 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 141
+0%
141
+0%
Metro Exodus 90
+0%
90
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 79
+0%
79
+0%
Valorant 134
+0%
134
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Dota 2 93
+0%
93
+0%
Elden Ring 57
+0%
57
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 93
+0%
93
+0%
Metro Exodus 37
+0%
37
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 32
+0%
32
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 93
+0%
93
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 11
+0%
11
+0%
Dota 2 110
+0%
110
+0%
Far Cry 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Fortnite 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 79
+0%
79
+0%
Valorant 76
+0%
76
+0%

This is how 7950 GX2 and RTX 3080 Mobile compete in popular games:

  • RTX 3080 Mobile is 11900% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 63 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.52 42.81
Recency 5 June 2006 12 January 2021
Maximum RAM amount 512 MB 8 GB
Chip lithography 90 nm 8 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 110 Watt 115 Watt

7950 GX2 has 4.5% lower power consumption.

RTX 3080 Mobile, on the other hand, has a 8132.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 14 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 1025% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce RTX 3080 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 7950 GX2 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce 7950 GX2 is a desktop card while GeForce RTX 3080 Mobile is a notebook one.


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 GeForce 7950 GX2
GeForce 7950 GX2
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Mobile
GeForce RTX 3080 Mobile

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 56 votes

Rate GeForce 7950 GX2 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 799 votes

Rate GeForce RTX 3080 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.