Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile vs GeForce GTX 295

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 295 with Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile, including specs and performance data.

GTX 295
2009
1792 MB GDDR3, 289 Watt
3.13

RTX 3000 Mobile outperforms GTX 295 by a whopping 738% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking748206
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.12no data
Power efficiency0.7723.41
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameGT200BTU106
Market segmentDesktopMobile workstation
Release date8 January 2009 (15 years ago)27 May 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$500 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 cores4802304
CUDA cores per GPU240no data
Core clock speed576 MHz945 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1380 MHz
Number of transistors1,400 million10,800 million
Manufacturing process technology55 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)289 Watt80 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature105 °Cno data
Texture fill rate46.08198.7
Floating-point processing power0.5962 TFLOPS6.359 TFLOPS
ROPs2864
TMUs80144
Tensor Coresno data288
Ray Tracing Coresno data36

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 2.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length267 mmno data
Height4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pinno data
SLI options+-

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 amount1792 MB6 GB
Standard memory config per GPU896 MBno data
Memory bus width896 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed999 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth223.8 GB/s448.0 GB/s
Memory interface width per GPU448 Bitno 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 ConnectorsTwo Dual Link DVIHDMINo outputs
Multi monitor support+no data
HDMI+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
G-SYNC support-+
Audio input for HDMIS/PDIFno data

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

High Dynamic-Range Lighting (HDRR)128bitno data
VR Readyno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 Ultimate (12_1)
Shader Model4.06.5
OpenGL2.14.6
OpenCL1.11.2
VulkanN/A1.2.131
CUDA+7.5

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.

GTX 295 3.13
RTX 3000 Mobile 26.22
+738%

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.

GTX 295 1206
RTX 3000 Mobile 10116
+739%

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 HD10−12
−860%
96
+860%
4K10−12
−780%
88
+780%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 77
+0%
77
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Battlefield 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Far Cry 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Hitman 3 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Metro Exodus 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Battlefield 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Far Cry 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Hitman 3 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Metro Exodus 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 39
+0%
39
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Far Cry 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Hitman 3 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 56
+0%
56
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Far Cry 5 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Hitman 3 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Metro Exodus 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Hitman 3 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Metro Exodus 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

This is how GTX 295 and RTX 3000 Mobile compete in popular games:

  • RTX 3000 Mobile is 860% faster in 1080p
  • RTX 3000 Mobile is 780% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 72 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.13 26.22
Recency 8 January 2009 27 May 2019
Maximum RAM amount 1792 MB 6 GB
Chip lithography 55 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 289 Watt 80 Watt

RTX 3000 Mobile has a 737.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, a 242.9% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 358.3% more advanced lithography process, and 261.3% lower power consumption.

The Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 295 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 295 is a desktop card while Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile is a mobile workstation 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 GTX 295
GeForce GTX 295
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile
Quadro RTX 3000 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.


3.9 80 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 295 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 271 vote

Rate Quadro RTX 3000 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.