NVIDIA CMP 40HX vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA CMP 40HX and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER occupy entirely different corners of the GPU landscape, and the recorded benchmark data reflects that division clearly. In the two head-to-head tests available, the RTX 4080 SUPER wins both outright, with no benchmark wins recorded for the CMP 40HX. That is a clean sweep, but the scale of the victory varies significantly between the two workloads.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the RTX 4080 SUPER scores 219065 against the CMP 40HX's 93395, a delta of -57.4% from the perspective of the older card. That is a dominant margin, but the Vulkan result is even more lopsided. The RTX 4080 SUPER posts 260075 versus 77879, a delta of -70.1%. The CMP 40HX is not merely behind in Vulkan; it is behind by more than two-thirds of its own score. For applications that lean on Vulkan compute or rendering, the RTX 4080 SUPER is in a different performance class entirely.

The CMP 40HX does have its own context, however. Its average benchmark score across all recorded tests is 85637, which places it at the 93rd percentile of all GPUs in the database. That is a strong overall standing, well above the median. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon PRO W7600 at 87108 (-1.7%), the NVIDIA Quadro GP100 at 87445 (-2.1%), the AMD Radeon PRO W6600 at 81995 (+4.4%), and the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64X at 80959 (+5.8%). So the CMP 40HX sits in a tight cluster with professional workstation cards, trading blows within a few percentage points. It wins against the PRO W6600 and Pro Vega 64X, and loses narrowly to the PRO W7600 and Quadro GP100.

The RTX 4080 SUPER, by contrast, has an average benchmark score of 54209, which seems counterintuitive given its raw performance in individual tests. That figure is pulled down by its passmark DirectX 9, 10, 11, and 12 results, which are low-numbered legacy tests. Its percentile standing is 86th, below the CMP 40HX's 93rd percentile, despite the RTX 4080 SUPER demolishing the CMP 40HX in both Geekbench tests. The explanation lies in the benchmark mix. The CMP 40HX only has Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan results recorded, both of which are high-scoring compute-oriented tests. The RTX 4080 SUPER has a much broader test profile, including several older DirectX tests that score low and drag down its average.

This is the key takeaway for use-case selection. If the workload is modern compute or Vulkan-based rendering, the RTX 4080 SUPER is overwhelmingly faster. If the workload is a narrow set of OpenCL and Vulkan tasks where the CMP 40HX's 93rd percentile ranking matters, the older card is still competitive within its niche, but it cannot match the newer card's peak scores.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations and different manufacturing processes, and those differences explain much of the performance gap. The CMP 40HX uses the TU106 chip built on Turing architecture, fabricated by TSMC on a 12 nm process. The die measures 445 mm² and contains 10,800 million transistors, giving a transistor density of 24.3 million per square millimeter. The RTX 4080 SUPER uses the AD103 chip on Ada Lovelace architecture, also from TSMC but on a 5 nm process. Its die is smaller at 379 mm², yet it packs 45,900 million transistors, a density of 121.1 million per square millimeter. That is roughly five times the transistor density, which is the defining architectural leap between the two.

The compute resources scale accordingly. The CMP 40HX has 2304 shading units, 144 texture mapping units, and 64 raster output pipelines. The RTX 4080 SUPER has 10240 shading units, 320 TMUs, and 112 ROPs. The newer card has more than four times the shading units, more than double the TMUs, and nearly double the ROPs. Ray tracing hardware also differs: the CMP 40HX has 36 RT cores, while the RTX 4080 SUPER has 80. Tensor cores go from 288 on the CMP 40HX to 320 on the RTX 4080 SUPER. The gap in raw throughput is enormous. The CMP 40HX delivers 7.603 TFLOPS of FP32 and 15.21 TFLOPS of FP16 at a 2:1 ratio. The RTX 4080 SUPER delivers 52.22 TFLOPS of FP32 and 52.22 TFLOPS of FP16 at a 1:1 ratio. That is nearly seven times the FP32 throughput.

Memory architecture also diverges. The CMP 40HX uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, with 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth and an effective memory clock of 14 Gbps. The RTX 4080 SUPER uses 16 GB of GDDR6X on the same 256-bit bus width, but bandwidth rises to 736.3 GB/s with an effective 23 Gbps. The newer card has double the capacity and roughly 64% more bandwidth.

The CMP 40HX is a mining-focused product with no display outputs. The RTX 4080 SUPER is a full consumer graphics card with 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. The bus interfaces differ too: the CMP 40HX lists PCIe 1.0 x4, which is unusual and likely a limitation of its mining-oriented design, while the RTX 4080 SUPER uses PCIe 4.0 x16. Both cards support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API compatibility is not a differentiator.

Physical characteristics also separate them. The CMP 40HX is a dual-slot card measuring 229 mm in length, 111 mm in height, and 35 mm in width, with a single 8-pin power connector and a suggested PSU of 450 W. The RTX 4080 SUPER is a triple-slot card at 310 mm long, 140 mm tall, and 61 mm wide, using a 16-pin connector with a suggested PSU of 700 W. The CMP 40HX has a TDP of 185 W, while the RTX 4080 SUPER draws 320 W.

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The CMP 40HX has a higher average benchmark score of 85637, compared to 54209 for the RTX 4080 SUPER. However, the RTX 4080 SUPER's average is weighted down by several low-scoring legacy DirectX tests, while the CMP 40HX only has two high-scoring Geekbench results recorded.

Q: How does the RTX 4080 SUPER compare to the CMP 40HX in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The RTX 4080 SUPER scores 219065 in OpenCL, while the CMP 40HX scores 93395. The delta is -57.4% from the CMP 40HX's perspective, meaning the RTX 4080 SUPER is more than double the score.

Q: What about Vulkan performance on the RTX 4080 SUPER?

A: The RTX 4080 SUPER scores 260075 in Geekbench Vulkan, versus 77879 for the CMP 40HX. The delta is -70.1%, the largest margin between the two cards in the head-to-head data.

Q: Is the CMP 40HX competitive with professional workstation cards?

A: Yes. The CMP 40HX's nearest rivals in the database are the AMD Radeon PRO W7600 at 87108 (-1.7%), the NVIDIA Quadro GP100 at 87445 (-2.1%), the AMD Radeon PRO W6600 at 81995 (+4.4%), and the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64X at 80959 (+5.8%). It sits within a few percentage points of all four.

Q: What are the memory differences between the two cards?

A: The CMP 40HX has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth and 14 Gbps effective memory clock. The RTX 4080 SUPER has 16 GB of GDDR6X on a 256-bit bus with 736.3 GB/s of bandwidth and 23 Gbps effective memory clock.

Q: Which card has more shading units and ray tracing cores?

A: The RTX 4080 SUPER has 10240 shading units and 80 RT cores. The CMP 40HX has 2304 shading units and 36 RT cores.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every specification field. The CMP 40HX uses a 12 nm process, the RTX 4080 SUPER uses 5 nm. Transistor count is 10,800 million versus 45,900 million, and die size is 445 mm² versus 379 mm². Transistor density is 24.3 million per square millimeter for the CMP 40HX and 121.1 million per square millimeter for the RTX 4080 SUPER.

Clock speeds differ substantially. Base clock is 1470 MHz on the CMP 40HX and 2295 MHz on the RTX 4080 SUPER. Boost clock is 1650 MHz versus 2550 MHz. Memory clock is 1750 MHz with 14 Gbps effective on the CMP 40HX, and 1438 MHz with 23 Gbps effective on the RTX 4080 SUPER.

Memory capacity is 8 GB versus 16 GB, with GDDR6 on the older card and GDDR6X on the newer. Both use a 256-bit bus, but bandwidth is 448.0 GB/s versus 736.3 GB/s. Shading units are 2304 versus 10240, TMUs are 144 versus 320, ROPs are 64 versus 112, RT cores are 36 versus 80, and tensor cores are 288 versus 320.

Pixel rate is 105.6 GPixel/s on the CMP 40HX and 285.6 GPixel/s on the RTX 4080 SUPER. Texture rate is 237.6 GTexel/s versus 816.0 GTexel/s. FP32 is 7.603 TFLOPS versus 52.22 TFLOPS. FP16 is 15.21 TFLOPS at 2:1 ratio versus 52.22 TFLOPS at 1:1 ratio.

TDP is 185 W versus 320 W. Slot width is dual-slot on the CMP 40HX and triple-slot on the RTX 4080 SUPER. Power connectors are 1x 8-pin versus 1x 16-pin. Suggested PSU is 450 W for the CMP 40HX and 700 W for the RTX 4080 SUPER. Bus interface is PCIe 1.0 x4 versus PCIe 4.0 x16. The CMP 40HX has no display outputs, while the RTX 4080 SUPER has 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a. Dimensions are 229 mm long, 111 mm high, 35 mm wide versus 310 mm long, 310 mm high, 61 mm wide. Release dates are 2021-02-24 for the CMP 40HX and 2024-01-30 for the RTX 4080 SUPER. Launch MSRP is 699 USD for the CMP 40HX and 999 USD for the RTX 4080 SUPER. Both cards are end-of-life in production status.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data contains two tests, and the RTX 4080 SUPER wins both, so the story is defined by magnitude of victory rather than split results. Starting with Geekbench OpenCL: the RTX 4080 SUPER posts 219065 against the CMP 40HX's 93395, a delta of -57.7%. The CMP 40HX's OpenCL score is strong in absolute terms, good enough to beat the AMD Radeon PRO W6600 and AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64X in its rival list, but the RTX 4080 SUPER more than doubles it. A workload that takes the CMP 40HX to 93395 OpenCL points would take the RTX 4080 SUPER to 219065, which is an enormous gulf. The RTX 4080 SUPER's OpenCL score is comparable to its own Geekbench Vulkan score of 260075, meaning that the newer card holds up well across different compute APIs. The CMP 40HX cannot say the same, as its Vulkan score of 77879 is notably lower than its OpenCL result.

Geekbench Vulkan shows the widest gap between the two cards: 260075 for the RTX 4080 SUPER against 77879 for the CMP 40HX, a delta of -70.1%. The CMP 40HX's Vulkan performance lags its OpenCL by roughly 16.6%, a shortfall that indicates Vulkan is not a strength for the Turing-based card. For the RTX 4080 SUPER, Vulkan is its strongest recorded result among the compute tests, outpacing its OpenCL score by about 18.7%. That means the RTX 4080 SUPER is not just ahead, it is ahead by the largest margin in the entire head-to-head set. In absolute terms, the 260075 Vulkan score is more than triple the CMP 40HX's Vulkan score, a 3.34x multiplier.

Outside the head-to-head tests, the overall score averages tell a complementary story. The CMP 40HX's average of 85637 places its two Geekbench scores, since it lacks the legacy DirectX tests that the RTX 4080 SUPER has recorded, the CMP 40HX average is not diluted by any low-scoring passmark results. The RTX 4080 SUPER has an average of 54209, weighed down by passmark DirectX 9 at 381, passmark DirectX 10 at 193, passmark DirectX 11 at 301, passmark DirectX 12 at 134, passmark G2D at 1270, passmark G3D at 34245, and passmark GPU compute at 19822. The CMP 40HX has no other benchmark entries beyond its two Geekbench scores. This benchmark mix difference explains why the RTX 4080 SUPER's percentile ranking of 86th, which is lower than the CMP 40HX's 86th percentile, even though the RTX 4080 SUPER dominates the CMP 40HX in compute performance by a wide margin. Benchmark results indicate that the CMP 40HX is a narrow compute specialist, ranking high in a limited set of APIs, while the RTX 4080 SUPER is a broad generalist, ranking lower on average across a wider range of tests.