A10G vs GeForce RTX 2080

Place in the ranking	65	66
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	26.60	no data
Power efficiency	15.63	22.35
Architecture	Turing (2018−2022)	Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code name	TU104	GA102
Market segment	Desktop	Workstation
Release date	20 September 2018 (6 years ago)	12 April 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$699	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 cores	2944	9216
Core clock speed	1515 MHz	1320 MHz
Boost clock speed	1710 MHz	1710 MHz
Number of transistors	13,600 million	28,300 million
Manufacturing process technology	12 nm	8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	215 Watt	150 Watt
Texture fill rate	314.6	492.5
Floating-point processing power	10.07 TFLOPS	31.52 TFLOPS
ROPs	64	96
TMUs	184	288
Tensor Cores	368	288
Ray Tracing Cores	46	72

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).

Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x16
Length	267 mm	267 mm
Width	2-slot	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin	8-pin EPS

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	GDDR6	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	12 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	384 Bit
Memory clock speed	1750 MHz	1563 MHz
Memory bandwidth	448.0 GB/s	600.2 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 Connectors	1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort, 1x USB Type-C	No outputs
HDMI	+	-
G-SYNC support	+	-

Supported technologies

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

VR Ready

no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 Ultimate (12_1)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	6.5	6.6
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	3.0
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.2
CUDA	7.5	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.

RTX 2080 48.82
+0.2%

A10G 48.70

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.

RTX 2080 18770
+0.3%

A10G 18723

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

RTX 2080 104912

A10G 162777
+55.2%

GeekBench 5 Vulkan

RTX 2080 106045

A10G 143546
+35.4%

GeekBench 5 CUDA

RTX 2080 119410

A10G 187763
+57.2%

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	144 +2.9%	140−150 −2.9%
1440p	101 +1%	100−110 −1%
4K	72 +2.9%	70−75 −2.9%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	4.85	no data
1440p	6.92	no data
4K	9.71	no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	100−110 +8%	100−105 −8%
Cyberpunk 2077	100−110 +8%	100−105 −8%
Elden Ring	170−180 +4.1%	170−180 −4.1%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	90 +5.9%	85−90 −5.9%
Counter-Strike 2	100−110 +8%	100−105 −8%
Cyberpunk 2077	50 +11.1%	45−50 −11.1%
Forza Horizon 4	250−260 +0.4%	250−260 −0.4%
Metro Exodus	105 +5%	100−105 −5%
Red Dead Redemption 2	109 +9%	100−105 −9%
Valorant	249 +3.8%	240−250 −3.8%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	188 +4.4%	180−190 −4.4%
Counter-Strike 2	100−110 +8%	100−105 −8%
Cyberpunk 2077	43 +7.5%	40−45 −7.5%
Dota 2	87 +2.4%	85−90 −2.4%
Elden Ring	170−180 +4.1%	170−180 −4.1%
Far Cry 5	100−110 +7%	100−105 −7%
Fortnite	193 +1.6%	190−200 −1.6%
Forza Horizon 4	250−260 +0.4%	250−260 −0.4%
Grand Theft Auto V	131 +0.8%	130−140 −0.8%
Metro Exodus	88 +3.5%	85−90 −3.5%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	245 +2.1%	240−250 −2.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2	80 +6.7%	75−80 −6.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	170−180 +2.4%	170−180 −2.4%
Valorant	145 +3.6%	140−150 −3.6%
World of Tanks	270−280 +3.3%	270−280 −3.3%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	79 +5.3%	75−80 −5.3%
Counter-Strike 2	100−110 +8%	100−105 −8%
Cyberpunk 2077	38 +8.6%	35−40 −8.6%
Dota 2	140−150 +0.7%	140−150 −0.7%
Far Cry 5	100−110 +7%	100−105 −7%
Forza Horizon 4	250−260 +0.4%	250−260 −0.4%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	160 +6.7%	150−160 −6.7%
Valorant	223 +1.4%	220−230 −1.4%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	90−95 +4.4%	90−95 −4.4%
Elden Ring	100−110 +9%	100−105 −9%
Grand Theft Auto V	90−95 +4.4%	90−95 −4.4%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 +2.9%	170−180 −2.9%
Red Dead Redemption 2	52 +4%	50−55 −4%
World of Tanks	300−350 +3.3%	300−310 −3.3%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	80 +6.7%	75−80 −6.7%
Counter-Strike 2	55−60 +10%	50−55 −10%
Cyberpunk 2077	25 +4.2%	24−27 −4.2%
Far Cry 5	150−160 +2%	150−160 −2%
Forza Horizon 4	150−160 +7.1%	140−150 −7.1%
Metro Exodus	89 +4.7%	85−90 −4.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	90−95 +3.3%	90−95 −3.3%
Valorant	161 +0.6%	160−170 −0.6%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	50−55 +8%	50−55 −8%
Dota 2	107 +7%	100−105 −7%
Elden Ring	50−55 +6%	50−55 −6%
Grand Theft Auto V	107 +7%	100−105 −7%
Metro Exodus	39 +11.4%	35−40 −11.4%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	146 +4.3%	140−150 −4.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2	34 +13.3%	30−33 −13.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	107 +7%	100−105 −7%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	60 +9.1%	55−60 −9.1%
Counter-Strike 2	50−55 +8%	50−55 −8%
Cyberpunk 2077	12 +20%	10−11 −20%
Dota 2	100−110 +3%	100−105 −3%
Far Cry 5	80−85 +6.7%	75−80 −6.7%
Fortnite	75−80 +1.3%	75−80 −1.3%
Forza Horizon 4	85−90 +6.3%	80−85 −6.3%
Valorant	88 +3.5%	85−90 −3.5%

This is how RTX 2080 and A10G compete in popular games:

RTX 2080 is 3% faster in 1080p
RTX 2080 is 1% faster in 1440p
RTX 2080 is 3% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	48.82	48.70
Recency	20 September 2018	12 April 2021
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	12 GB
Chip lithography	12 nm	8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	215 Watt	150 Watt

RTX 2080 has a 0.2% higher aggregate performance score.

A10G, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, a 50% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 50% more advanced lithography process, and 43.3% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between GeForce RTX 2080 and A10G.

Be aware that GeForce RTX 2080 is a desktop card while A10G is a workstation one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.