NVIDIA CMP 30HX vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded benchmark data shows a complete sweep in favor of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER. Out of the two shared tests, the CMP 30HX does not secure a single win. The RTX 4080 SUPER dominates in both OpenCL and Vulkan compute workloads, with margins that are not close. For the CMP 30HX, its best showing is in the Geekbench OpenCL test, where it still loses by a massive 70.2% margin. The Vulkan result is even starker, with the CMP 30HX trailing by 76%.

This means the use-case split is simple. If your workload relies on general-purpose GPU compute through APIs like OpenCL or Vulkan, the RTX 4080 SUPER is the only rational choice. The CMP 30HX, being a mining-oriented card with no display outputs, was never designed for interactive graphics or gaming. Its benchmark profile, when compared directly, shows it is outclassed in every measurable way by the newer architecture.

For tasks like machine learning inference, rendering, or any compute-heavy application that can leverage Vulkan or OpenCL, the RTX 4080 SUPER delivers roughly 3.4 times the OpenCL score and over 4.1 times the Vulkan score of the CMP 30HX. The CMP 30HX does have a respectable percentile ranking of 89 against all GPUs, which suggests it is not a weak card in absolute terms, but against the RTX 4080 SUPER, its performance is simply not competitive.

Architecture Differences

The two cards represent completely different generations of NVIDIA hardware. The CMP 30HX is built on the Turing architecture with the TU116 chip, fabricated on TSMC's 12 nm process. It packs 6,600 million transistors into a 284 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 23.2 million per square millimeter. The RTX 4080 SUPER, by contrast, uses the Ada Lovelace architecture with the AD103 chip on a 5 nm process. It houses 45,900 million transistors on a 379 mm² die, achieving a density of 121.1 million per square millimeter. That is over five times the transistor density, which explains the enormous performance gap.

Core configuration differs wildly. The CMP 30HX has 1,408 shading units, 88 texture mapping units, and 48 raster output pipelines. It has no dedicated ray tracing cores and no tensor cores. The RTX 4080 SUPER features 10,240 shading units, 320 TMUs, and 112 ROPs. It also includes 80 ray tracing cores and 320 tensor cores, making it a fully featured modern GPU. The CMP 30HX cannot handle hardware-accelerated ray tracing or DLSS-style tensor operations, while the RTX 4080 SUPER is built for both.

Memory architecture is another major divergence. The CMP 30HX uses 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, delivering 336.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The RTX 4080 SUPER has 16 GB of GDDR6X on a 256-bit bus, with bandwidth reaching 736.3 GB/s. That is more than double the memory capacity and over double the bandwidth. Clock speeds also favor the newer card: the CMP 30HX boosts to 1785 MHz, while the RTX 4080 SUPER boosts to 2550 MHz. The RTX 4080 SUPER also runs its memory at 23 Gbps effective, versus 14 Gbps on the CMP 30HX.

Power and physical design are equally different. The CMP 30HX has a 125 W TDP, a dual-slot cooler, and a single 8-pin power connector, with a suggested 300 W power supply. The RTX 4080 SUPER demands 320 W, uses a triple-slot cooler, a single 16-pin connector, and recommends a 700 W power supply. The CMP 30HX is 229 mm long, 111 mm tall, and 35 mm wide. The RTX 4080 SUPER is 310 mm long, 140 mm tall, and 61 mm wide, making it substantially larger in every dimension.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Geekbench OpenCL test shows the RTX 4080 SUPER scoring 219,065 against the CMP 30HX's 65,199. That is a delta of 70.2% in favor of the RTX 4080 SUPER. In practical terms, the RTX 4080 SUPER is approximately 3.36 times faster in this compute workload. This is a raw compute test that stresses FP32 throughput, and the numbers align with the theoretical specs: the RTX 4080 SUPER delivers 52.22 TFLOPS of FP32, while the CMP 30HX manages only 5.027 TFLOPS.

The Geekbench Vulkan test is even more one-sided. The RTX 4080 SUPER scores 260,075, while the CMP 30HX scores 62,484, a delta of 76%. That is roughly 4.16 times the performance. Vulkan is a low-level graphics and compute API, and the RTX 4080 SUPER's superior hardware, including its 320 tensor cores and 80 ray tracing cores, likely contributes to this massive advantage. The CMP 30HX has no such specialized hardware.

These head-to-head results are consistent with the average benchmark scores in the database. The CMP 30HX has an average benchmark score of 63,842, placing it in the 89th percentile of all GPUs. The RTX 4080 SUPER has an average score of 54,209, which puts it in the 86th percentile. The discrepancy between the average scores and the head-to-head results is because the average includes a broader set of benchmarks, many of which are not shared between the two cards. The RTX 4080 SUPER has been tested across 3DMark, PassMark, and Geekbench suites, while the CMP 30HX only has two Geekbench entries. However, in the tests where both cards appear, the RTX 4080 SUPER wins decisively.

FAQ

Q: Which card has more shading units?

A: The RTX 4080 SUPER has 10,240 shading units, while the CMP 30HX has 1,408.

Q: Does the CMP 30HX support ray tracing?

A: No. The CMP 30HX has no ray tracing cores listed, while the RTX 4080 SUPER includes 80.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The CMP 30HX provides 336.0 GB/s over a 192-bit bus with 6 GB GDDR6. The RTX 4080 SUPER provides 736.3 GB/s over a 256-bit bus with 16 GB GDDR6X.

Q: Which card has a higher boost clock?

A: The RTX 4080 SUPER boosts to 2550 MHz, compared to 1785 MHz for the CMP 30HX.

Q: Can the CMP 30HX output video to a display?

A: No, the CMP 30HX has no display outputs. The RTX 4080 SUPER has 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a.

Q: How do their transistor counts compare?

A: The RTX 4080 SUPER has 45,900 million transistors, versus 6,600 million for the CMP 30HX.

The Verdict

The data points to one conclusion: the RTX 4080 SUPER is the superior product in every measured category. If you need a GPU for compute workloads, especially those using OpenCL or Vulkan, the RTX 4080 SUPER is the clear pick. Its scores are 70% to 76% higher than the CMP 30HX in the shared benchmarks, and it offers far more memory, bandwidth, and specialized hardware like ray tracing and tensor cores.

The CMP 30HX is an end-of-life mining card with no display outputs. It was never meant for gaming or general-purpose desktop use. Its performance, while respectable in the 89th percentile of all GPUs, is simply not in the same league as the RTX 4080 SUPER. The CMP 30HX is a niche product for a specific mining workload that no longer exists in the current market.

For anyone building a system today, the RTX 4080 SUPER is the only sensible choice between these two. It has a higher launch MSRP of 999 USD, but that is justified by its massive performance advantage. The CMP 30HX had a launch MSRP of 799 USD, but its lack of display outputs and obsolete architecture make it unsuitable for modern compute tasks. The RTX 4080 SUPER is also a triple-slot card with a 320 W TDP, so ensure your case and power supply can handle it. The CMP 30HX is a dual-slot card with a 125 W TDP, but that lower power draw does not compensate for its lack of performance.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA CMP 30HX | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER |

|---|---|---|

| Architecture | Turing | Ada Lovelace |

| Process Node | 12 nm | 5 nm |

| Transistors | 6,600 million | 45,900 million |

| Die Size | 284 mm² | 379 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 23.2M / mm² | 121.1M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1530 MHz | 2295 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1785 MHz | 2550 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 14 Gbps effective | 23 Gbps effective |

| Memory Size | 6 GB | 16 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR6X |

| Memory Bus Width | 192 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 336.0 GB/s | 736.3 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 1408 | 10240 |

| TMUs | 88 | 320 |

| ROPs | 48 | 112 |

| RT Cores | None | 80 |

| Tensor Cores | None | 320 |

| Pixel Rate | 85.68 GPixel/s | 285.6 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 157.1 GTexel/s | 816.0 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 5.027 TFLOPS | 52.22 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 10.05 TFLOPS (2:1) | 52.22 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 125 W | 320 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | Triple-slot |

| Power Connectors | 1x 8-pin | 1x 16-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 300 W | 700 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 1.0 x4 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | No outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a |

| DirectX Support | 12 (12_1) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |

| Length | 229 mm | 310 mm |

| Height | 111 mm | 140 mm |

| Width | 35 mm | 61 mm |

| Release Date | 2021-02-24 | 2024-01-30 |

| Launch MSRP | 799 USD | 999 USD |