NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Mobile vs NVIDIA Quadro GV100
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Mobile and NVIDIA Quadro GV100 videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score, PassMark - G2D Mark, PassMark - G3D Mark, GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), Geekbench - OpenCL, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s).
Differences
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Mobile
- Videocard is newer: launch date 10 month(s) later
- Around 22% higher core clock speed: 1380 MHz vs 1132 MHz
- Around 67% lower typical power consumption: 150 Watt vs 250 Watt
- 7.1x more memory clock speed: 12000 MHz vs 1696 MHz
- Around 15% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 22622 vs 19663
- Around 15% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 22622 vs 19663
- Around 70% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 6319 vs 3713
- Around 70% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 6319 vs 3713
- Around 70% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 5714 vs 3357
- Around 70% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 5714 vs 3357
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 29 January 2019 vs 27 March 2018 |
| Core clock speed | 1380 MHz vs 1132 MHz |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 150 Watt vs 250 Watt |
| Memory clock speed | 12000 MHz vs 1696 MHz |
| Benchmarks | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 22622 vs 19663 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 22622 vs 19663 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 6319 vs 3713 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 6319 vs 3713 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 5714 vs 3357 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 5714 vs 3357 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro GV100
- Around 2% higher boost clock speed: 1628 MHz vs 1590 MHz
- Around 74% higher pipelines: 5120 vs 2944
- Around 5% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 848 vs 804
- Around 32% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 19824 vs 15014
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Boost clock speed | 1628 MHz vs 1590 MHz |
| Pipelines | 5120 vs 2944 |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 848 vs 804 |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 19824 vs 15014 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Mobile
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro GV100
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
| Name | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Mobile | NVIDIA Quadro GV100 |
|---|---|---|
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 10073 | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 804 | 848 |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 15014 | 19824 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 22622 | 19663 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 22622 | 19663 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 6319 | 3713 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 6319 | 3713 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 5714 | 3357 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 5714 | 3357 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 143963 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 562.775 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 141.066 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 1964.377 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Mobile | NVIDIA Quadro GV100 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Turing | Volta |
| Code name | TU104 | GV100 |
| Launch date | 29 January 2019 | 27 March 2018 |
| Place in performance rating | 95 | 93 |
| Price now | $699.99 | |
| Type | Laptop | Workstation |
| Value for money (0-100) | 37.18 | |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $8,999 | |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1590 MHz | 1628 MHz |
| Core clock speed | 1380 MHz | 1132 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 12 nm | 12 nm |
| Pipelines | 2944 | 5120 |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 150 Watt | 250 Watt |
| Transistor count | 13,600 million | 21,100 million |
| Floating-point performance | 14,817 gflops | |
| Texture fill rate | 463.0 GTexel / s | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | No outputs | 4x DisplayPort |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Length | 267 mm | |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 | 12.0 (12_1) |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
Memory |
||
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 4096 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 12000 MHz | 1696 MHz |
| Memory type | GDDR6 | HBM2 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 32 GB | |
| Memory bandwidth | 870.4 GB / s | |

