NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti vs NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The GeForce RTX 3060 Ti dominates the head-to-head record, winning 8 of the 9 shared benchmark tests. The only test the RTX A2000 Mobile takes is Geekbench Vulkan, where it scores 53,146 against 47,784, a 10.1% advantage. That result is notable because it flips the expected ordering: the desktop card wins most compute and DirectX workloads, but the mobile part leads in this specific Vulkan workload.

Every other comparison is lopsided. In Passmark G3D, the RTX 3060 Ti scores 20,349 versus 9,611, a 111.7% lead. Passmark GPU Compute shows 10,006 versus 4,334, a 130.9% margin. Passmark DirectX 11 is 163 versus 68, a 139.7% gap, and Passmark DirectX 10 is 132 versus 57, a 131.6% gap. Even legacy DirectX 9 favors the desktop card: 234 versus 115, 103.5% higher. Passmark G2D, a measure of 2D performance, also goes to the RTX 3060 Ti at 989 versus 491, 101.4% higher.

The OpenCL results reinforce the pattern. Geekbench OpenCL gives the RTX 3060 Ti 78,927 points against 56,518 for the A2000 Mobile, a 39.6% advantage. The smallest win for the desktop card in Passmark tests is DirectX 12, where it scores 78 versus 47, a 66% lead; even that is a decisive margin. Overall, the average benchmark score of the RTX 3060 Ti is 16,129, while the RTX A2000 Mobile averages 13,821. The desktop card sits at the 59th percentile among all GPUs in the database, while the mobile part sits at the 55th percentile.

The nearest rivals provide context. The RTX 3060 Ti averages 0.7% above the AMD Radeon RX 9060, 1.4% below the AMD Radeon Pro 5600M, and 1.4% below the AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT. The RTX A2000 Mobile is nearly tied with the AMD Radeon 660M (0.1% ahead), 0.4% below the AMD Radeon RX 570X, and 0.6% above the AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT. These numbers place the two cards in very different performance tiers despite sharing the Ampere architecture.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs use the Ampere architecture, are built on Samsung's 8 nm process, and support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The similarities end there. The RTX 3060 Ti uses the GA104 chip with 17,400 million transistors on a 392 mm² die, while the RTX A2000 Mobile uses the GA107 chip with 8,700 million transistors on a 200 mm² die. Transistor density is close: 44.4 million per mm² for the desktop card versus 43.5 million per mm² for the mobile part.

The compute configuration diverges sharply. The RTX 3060 Ti has 4,864 shading units, 152 texture mapping units, 80 ROPs, 38 ray tracing cores, and 152 tensor cores. The RTX A2000 Mobile has 2,560 shading units, 80 TMUs, 48 ROPs, 20 ray tracing cores, and 80 tensor cores. That is roughly half the shading resources in the mobile chip, which directly explains the large benchmark gaps in rasterization and compute workloads.

Clock behavior differs as well. The RTX 3060 Ti runs at a 1,410 MHz base and 1,665 MHz boost. The RTX A2000 Mobile has a lower base of 1,215 MHz but a higher boost of 1,687 MHz. Despite the higher boost clock, the mobile part cannot overcome its smaller execution footprint. Pixel rate is 133.2 GPixel/s for the desktop card versus 80.98 GPixel/s for the mobile part. Texture rate is 253.1 GTexel/s versus 135.0 GTexel/s. FP32 throughput is 16.20 TFLOPS versus 8.637 TFLOPS, and FP16 is identical at 16.20 TFLOPS versus 8.637 TFLOPS, both at a 1:1 ratio.

Memory is another major divider. The RTX 3060 Ti has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth at 14 Gbps effective. The RTX A2000 Mobile has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 192.0 GB/s at 12 Gbps effective. That is less than half the bandwidth, which affects both gaming at high resolutions and compute workloads that stream data.

Power and physical design reflect their intended roles. The RTX 3060 Ti has a 200 W TDP, is a dual-slot card, uses a single 12-pin power connector, and requires a 550 W suggested PSU. It measures 242 mm in length and 112 mm in height, with display outputs of 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a. The RTX A2000 Mobile has a 95 W TDP, is an IGP (integrated graphics processor), uses no power connectors, has no listed PSU requirement, and its display outputs are listed as portable device dependent. Both use a PCIe 4.0 x16 bus interface.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 3060 Ti is the clear pick for desktop workloads that demand raw throughput. Its Passmark G3D score of 20,349 is more than double the A2000 Mobile's 9,611, making it the better option for high-fill-rate gaming, 3D rendering, and any application that stresses pixel and texture throughput. Its Passmark GPU Compute score of 10,006 versus 4,334 also makes it the stronger choice for GPGPU tasks like rendering, simulation, and machine learning inference at the FP32 level.

The RTX A2000 Mobile's single win in Geekbench Vulkan, 53,146 versus 47,784, suggests it can hold its own in specific Vulkan-based applications. The 10.1% edge in that test may come from driver optimization or workload characteristics that favor its configuration. However, this is an isolated result; the RTX 3060 Ti wins the OpenCL test by 39.6%, so the Vulkan win does not indicate general compute superiority.

For legacy DirectX workloads, the RTX 3060 Ti is also the winner. DirectX 9, 10, 11, and 12 tests all favor the desktop card by margins from 66% to 139.7%. The A2000 Mobile's scores of 115 in DirectX 9, 57 in DirectX 10, 68 in DirectX 11, and 47 in DirectX 12 are all far below the desktop card's 234, 132, 163, and 78 respectively. Even in 2D performance, the RTX 3060 Ti doubles the mobile part, 989 versus 491.

The RTX A2000 Mobile's role is defined by its form factor and power envelope. At 95 W with no power connectors and IGP classification, it is designed for portable workstations where the RTX 3060 Ti's 200 W dual-slot desktop footprint is not viable. Its 4 GB memory capacity and 192.0 GB/s bandwidth is enough for moderate 1080p workloads, and its higher boost clock of 1,687 MHz shows it can boost aggressively when power allows. The data suggests it wins in scenarios where mobile integration matters more than raw performance.

The RTX 3060 Ti's 8 GB memory and 448.0 GB/s bandwidth give it a clear advantage in memory-heavy tasks. The 256-bit bus is a major factor in its higher bandwidth, which benefits high-resolution textures, large datasets, and multi-tasking. The A2000 Mobile's 128-bit bus and 192.0 GB/s bandwidth are a limiting factor in those same scenarios.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti has an average benchmark score of 16,129, while the NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile has 13,821.

Q: How large is the performance gap in Passmark G3D?

A: The RTX 3060 Ti scores 20,349 versus 9,611 for the RTX A2000 Mobile, a 111.7% lead.

Q: Does the RTX A2000 Mobile win any benchmark?

A: Yes, it wins Geekbench Vulkan with a score of 53,146 versus 47,784, a 10.1% margin.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The RTX 3060 Ti has 448.0 GB/s bandwidth from 8 GB GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, while the RTX A2000 Mobile has 192.0 GB/s from 4 GB GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus.

Q: How do the shading unit counts compare?

A: The RTX 3060 Ti has 4,864 shading units, 152 TMUs, and 80 ROPs, while the RTX A2000 Mobile has 2,560 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 48 ROPs.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same APIs?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti is the far more powerful GPU. It wins 8 of 9 head-to-head benchmarks, often by more than 100%. Its 16.20 TFLOPS FP32 throughput, 8 GB GDDR6 memory, and 448.0 GB/s bandwidth make it the superior choice for gaming, rendering, and compute tasks. The RTX A2000 Mobile's 8.637 TFLOPS, 4 GB memory, and 192.0 GB/s bandwidth place it in a much lower performance tier, despite sharing the Ampere architecture and 8 nm process node.

The RTX A2000 Mobile is not without merit. Its 95 W TDP, IGP form factor, no power connectors, and portable device dependent display outputs make it a viable option for compact mobile workstations. Its higher boost clock of 1,687 MHz and its Vulkan win show it can be competitive in specific workloads. But for anyone comparing raw performance, the RTX 3060 Ti is the clear choice. The 59th percentile versus 55th percentile ranking among all GPUs in the database underscores the gap: the desktop card is in a higher performance bracket.

The RTX 3060 Ti also has the advantage of being end-of-life with a 2020 release date, while the RTX A2000 Mobile is also end-of-life with a 2021 release date. Both are superseded, but the RTX 3060 Ti offers a launch MSRP of 399 USD, while the mobile part has no listed launch MSRP. The RTX 3060 Ti's predecessor is the GeForce 20 series and its successor is the GeForce 40 series; the RTX A2000 Mobile's predecessor is Quadro Turing-M and its successor is Ada-MW.

For desktop builders who need maximum performance per dollar of silicon, the RTX 3060 Ti is the obvious pick. For mobile workstation integrators who need a low-power Ampere GPU with ray tracing and tensor cores, the RTX A2000 Mobile is the only option in this comparison. The verdict from the benchmark data is simple: the RTX 3060 Ti is the stronger GPU, and the RTX A2000 Mobile is a specialized mobile part that sacrifices performance for portability.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti | NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile |

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

| Chip | GA104 | GA107 |

| Generation | GeForce 30 | Ampere-MW (Ax000) |

| Transistors | 17,400 million | 8,700 million |

| Die Size | 392 mm² | 200 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 44.4M / mm² | 43.5M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1410 MHz | 1215 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1665 MHz | 1687 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1750 MHz, 14 Gbps effective | 1500 MHz, 12 Gbps effective |

| Memory Size | 8 GB | 4 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus Width | 256 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 448.0 GB/s | 192.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 4864 | 2560 |

| TMUs | 152 | 80 |

| ROPs | 80 | 48 |

| RT Cores | 38 | 20 |

| Tensor Cores | 152 | 80 |

| Pixel Rate | 133.2 GPixel/s | 80.98 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 253.1 GTexel/s | 135.0 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 16.20 TFLOPS | 8.637 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 16.20 TFLOPS (1:1) | 8.637 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 200 W | 95 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | IGP |

| Power Connectors | 1x 12-pin | None |

| Suggested PSU | 550 W | None |

| Display Outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a | Portable Device Dependent |

| Release Date | 2020-11-30 | 2021-04-11 |

| Predecessor | GeForce 20 | Quadro Turing-M |

| Successor | GeForce 40 | Ada-MW |

| Launch MSRP | 399 USD | None |

| Dimensions | 242 mm length, 112 mm height | None listed |