NVIDIA CMP 30HX vs NVIDIA RTX A3000 Mobile Comparison

The NVIDIA RTX A3000 Mobile and NVIDIA CMP 30HX are both end-of-life NVIDIA products, but they target fundamentally different use cases. The A3000 Mobile is a professional laptop GPU built on the Ampere architecture, while the CMP 30HX is a desktop mining card based on Turing. Benchmark data from Geekbench shows a split decision: the A3000 Mobile wins OpenCL by a significant 21.3%, while the CMP 30HX takes Vulkan by a narrow 2.1%. The average benchmark scores reflect this, with the A3000 Mobile at 70,140 versus the CMP 30HX at 63,842. This places the A3000 Mobile in the 91st percentile of all GPUs, while the CMP 30HX sits in the 89th percentile.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A3000 Mobile leads with an average benchmark score of 70,140, compared to the NVIDIA CMP 30HX's 63,842. This represents a roughly 9.9% advantage for the A3000 Mobile based on the raw score difference.

Q: How do the two cards compare in OpenCL performance?

A: In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the RTX A3000 Mobile scores 79,091, which is 21.3% higher than the CMP 30HX's 65,199. This is the largest performance gap between the two cards in any benchmark.

Q: Does the CMP 30HX win any benchmark?

A: Yes, in the Geekbench Vulkan test, the CMP 30HX scores 62,484, edging out the RTX A3000 Mobile's 61,189 by 2.1%. However, this is a smaller margin than the A3000 Mobile's OpenCL victory.

Q: What are the closest rivals to the RTX A3000 Mobile?

A: The nearest rivals by average score are the NVIDIA Quadro P6000 (69,986, just 0.2% behind), the AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 (69,870, 0.4% behind), and the AMD Radeon RX 6600 LE (70,829, 1% ahead). The NVIDIA CMP 90HX trails at 69,000, which is 1.7% behind.

Q: What is the closest competitor to the CMP 30HX?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT LP matches the CMP 30HX almost exactly, scoring 63,830 versus 63,842 (0% delta). The AMD Radeon RX 7600M (63,775) and AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 (63,693) are also extremely close, within 0.1% and 0.2% respectively.

Q: What is the transistor count difference between the two chips?

A: The RTX A3000 Mobile uses the GA104 chip with 17,400 million transistors on an 8nm Samsung process. The CMP 30HX uses the TU116 chip with 6,600 million transistors on a 12nm TSMC process. This is a substantial difference in both transistor count and manufacturing process.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split based on workload. For OpenCL-heavy tasks, the RTX A3000 Mobile is the definitive choice, delivering a 21.3% performance advantage. Its average benchmark score of 70,140 places it in the 91st percentile, which is meaningfully higher than the CMP 30HX's 89th percentile. The A3000 Mobile also has a much larger compute foundation, with 4,096 shading units versus 1,408.

However, for Vulkan-specific workloads, the CMP 30HX holds a slim but real edge. Its 62,484 Vulkan score beats the A3000 Mobile's 61,189, suggesting that the older Turing architecture handles this API slightly better in this specific configuration. The CMP 30HX also has a higher boost clock (1,785 MHz vs 1,230 MHz) and faster memory (14 Gbps effective vs 11 Gbps effective), which may contribute to this result.

The CMP 30HX is a dual-slot card with a 125W TDP, requiring a 300W power supply and a single 8-pin connector. It has no display outputs, confirming its purpose as a dedicated compute or mining device. The RTX A3000 Mobile has a 70W TDP with no power connectors, and its display outputs are portable-device dependent, reflecting its laptop orientation.

Users needing a professional mobile GPU with broad API support should pick the RTX A3000 Mobile. Those building a desktop system for Vulkan-centric compute tasks and who can accommodate a higher power draw should consider the CMP 30HX. The A3000 Mobile is generally the stronger card, but the CMP 30HX is not without merit in its specific niche.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Geekbench results offer a straightforward comparison. In OpenCL, the RTX A3000 Mobile scores 79,091 against the CMP 30HX's 65,199. That is a 21.3% delta, a decisive victory for the Ampere-based card. This margin is substantial and suggests a significant architectural advantage in compute-heavy OpenCL workloads. The A3000 Mobile's FP32 throughput of 10.08 TFLOPS is exactly double the CMP 30HX's 5.027 TFLOPS, which aligns with the observed performance gap.

The Vulkan test flips the result, though by a much smaller margin. The CMP 30HX scores 62,484, while the A3000 Mobile trails at 61,189, a delta of -2.1%. This is within the noise of typical benchmark variance, but it is still a win for the CMP 30HX. The CMP 30HX's higher memory bandwidth (336.0 GB/s vs 264.0 GB/s) and faster memory clock (1750 MHz vs 1375 MHz) might partially explain this result, as Vulkan workloads can be memory-sensitive.

The average benchmark scores reinforce the OpenCL result. The A3000 Mobile averages 70,140, which is 9.9% above the CMP 30HX's 63,842. This makes the A3000 Mobile the overall stronger performer in aggregate metrics. The A3000 Mobile also sits closer to its nearest rivals, with delta percentages ranging from -1% to 1.7%, while the CMP 30HX's rivals are all within 0.6% of its score, indicating a tighter competitive cluster.

The win count is split at one each. The A3000 Mobile takes OpenCL, the CMP 30HX takes Vulkan. However, the magnitude of the A3000 Mobile's OpenCL win (21.3%) dwarfs the CMP 30HX's Vulkan win (2.1%). From a performance-per-benchmark perspective, the A3000 Mobile is the more impressive card, but the CMP 30HX cannot be dismissed entirely.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ significantly across almost every specification. The RTX A3000 Mobile has a base clock of 600 MHz and a boost clock of 1,230 MHz, while the CMP 30HX runs at 1,530 MHz base and 1,785 MHz boost. This gives the CMP 30HX a substantial raw clock speed advantage.

Memory specifications are mixed. Both cards have 6 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus. However, the CMP 30HX has a higher memory clock at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) versus the A3000 Mobile's 1375 MHz (11 Gbps effective). This results in the CMP 30HX having 336.0 GB/s of bandwidth versus 264.0 GB/s for the A3000 Mobile.

The compute unit counts favor the A3000 Mobile heavily. It has 4,096 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The CMP 30HX has 1,408 shading units, 88 TMUs, and 48 ROPs. The A3000 Mobile also has 32 RT cores and 128 tensor cores, while the CMP 30HX has none listed.

Power and physical specifications also diverge. The A3000 Mobile has a 70W TDP with no power connectors and no slot width specified. The CMP 30HX has a 125W TDP, is dual-slot, requires a 1x 8-pin power connector, and has a suggested PSU of 300W. Its dimensions are 229 mm in length, 111 mm in height, and 35 mm in width.

The bus interface differs: the A3000 Mobile uses PCIe 4.0 x16, while the CMP 30HX uses PCIe 1.0 x4. Display outputs are "Portable Device Dependent" for the A3000 Mobile and "No outputs" for the CMP 30HX. The CMP 30HX has a launch MSRP of 799 USD.

Architecture Differences

The RTX A3000 Mobile is built on the GA104 chip using the Ampere architecture, manufactured on an 8nm Samsung process. It contains 17,400 million transistors on a 392 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 44.4M per mm². It is part of the "Ampere-MW (Ax000)" generation and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

The CMP 30HX uses the TU116 chip with the older Turing architecture, manufactured on a 12nm TSMC process. It has 6,600 million transistors on a 284 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 23.2M per mm². It belongs to the "Mining GPUs" generation and supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

The architectural differences are stark. The A3000 Mobile has 4096 shading units versus 1,408, a nearly 3x difference. Its FP32 compute is 10.08 TFLOPS, exactly double the CMP 30HX's 5.027 TFLOPS. The A3000 Mobile also includes dedicated RT cores (32) and tensor cores (128), which are absent from the CMP 30HX's specifications.

The FP16 performance tells a different story. The A3000 Mobile offers 10.08 TFLOPS FP16 with a 1:1 ratio to FP32. The CMP 30HX also offers 10.05 TFLOPS FP16, but with a 2:1 ratio, meaning it achieves this by halving throughput for FP32. This makes the CMP 30HX competitive in FP16 tasks despite its lower overall compute.

Pixel and texture rates are nearly identical. The A3000 Mobile has a pixel rate of 78.72 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 157.4 GTexel/s. The CMP 30HX has 85.68 GPixel/s and 157.1 GTexel/s. The CMP 30HX's higher clocks help it match the A3000 Mobile in these metrics despite having fewer units.

The process node difference is significant: 8nm Samsung versus 12nm TSMC. This explains the A3000 Mobile's higher transistor density (44.4M vs 23.2M per mm²) and its lower TDP of 70W versus 125W. The A3000 Mobile achieves roughly double the FP32 throughput while drawing nearly half the power, a clear architectural generational improvement.