NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile vs NVIDIA RTX A500 Mobile Comparison

The NVIDIA RTX A500 Mobile and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile occupy vastly different tiers of the mobile GPU spectrum, and the benchmark data confirms a decisive performance gap. The RTX 4080 Mobile wins both head-to-head tests, with Geekbench OpenCL results showing a 74.1% advantage and Geekbench Vulkan results showing a 74% advantage. The RTX A500 Mobile, an Ampere-based professional part, is clearly outclassed by the Ada Lovelace flagship, but the data also reveals interesting nuances about where each GPU sits relative to its own competitive field.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Geekbench OpenCL score is the starkest illustration of the performance divide. The RTX A500 Mobile scores 41,263, while the RTX 4080 Mobile more than triples that with 159,575 points. This translates to a delta of -74.1%, meaning the A500 delivers only about a quarter of the raw compute throughput in this API. The Vulkan test tells a nearly identical story: the A500's 37,873 points versus the 4080's 145,807 points yields a -74% delta. These are not marginal differences; they represent a fundamental generational and architectural leap.

What makes these numbers more meaningful is context from the nearest rival lists. The RTX A500 Mobile's average benchmark score is 39,568, which places it just 0% above the AMD Radeon Pro 575 (39,555) and 1.2% above the Radeon Pro 575X (39,116). It is actually 1.2% below the Radeon Pro WX 7100 (40,063) and 1.9% below the Radeon Pro 580 (40,318). This tells us the A500 is a mid-pack professional mobile GPU, competitive with older AMD workstation parts but nowhere near the top tier. Conversely, the RTX 4080 Mobile's average score of 38,135 puts it 0.4% below the GeForce MX570 (38,299) and 0.6% below the RTX 5080 Mobile (38,349), while sitting 1.3% above both the RTX 4070 (37,648) and Tesla P4 (37,628). This is a fascinating quirk: despite winning the head-to-head by a massive margin, the 4080 Mobile's aggregate average is dragged down by its Passmark results, which are low in some tests.

The two Geekbench tests are the only direct comparisons available, and the 4080 Mobile wins both. There is no test where the A500 Mobile comes out ahead. The data does not show any benchmark category where the professional card's characteristics translate into a win, which reinforces the sheer compute disparity between the 30W A500 and the 110W 4080.

Where Each One Wins

Based solely on the benchmark wins, the RTX 4080 Mobile is the clear winner in both OpenCL and Vulkan workloads. OpenCL is commonly used for general-purpose GPU compute, including scientific simulation, video encoding, and machine learning inference, while Vulkan is a low-overhead graphics API used in modern games and professional visualization. The 4080's dominance in both suggests it is the superior choice for any task that leverages these APIs, from gaming to content creation.

The RTX A500 Mobile, however, has zero benchmark wins in this dataset. Its value proposition must be inferred from its specifications rather than its test results. The A500 is a 30W IGP-class part with no power connectors, making it suitable for thin-and-light professional laptops where battery life and thermal constraints are paramount. Its 4GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus with 96.00 GB/s bandwidth is modest, but for a professional workstation GPU, this might be sufficient for specific CAD or light rendering tasks that do not require massive memory pools. The A500's 82nd percentile rank among all GPUs versus the 4080's 81st percentile is another oddity — the A500 is technically rated higher in this aggregate metric, likely because the 4080's Passmark scores (which include low DirectX 9 and DirectX 12 numbers) drag its average down.

The use-case split is therefore about power and portability versus raw performance. The A500 wins in scenarios where the 30W TDP is a hard constraint, such as ultra-thin mobile workstations. The 4080 Mobile wins everywhere else, especially where the 12GB frame buffer and 432.0 GB/s bandwidth are needed for larger datasets or higher-resolution textures.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is generational. The RTX A500 Mobile uses the GA107S chip on the Ampere architecture, fabricated by Samsung on an 8 nm process. It packs 8,700 million transistors into a 200 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 43.5M per mm². The RTX 4080 Mobile, in contrast, uses the AD104 chip on the Ada Lovelace architecture, built by TSMC on a 5 nm process. This newer node allows for 35,800 million transistors in a 294 mm² die, which is a much higher density of 121.8M per mm². The 5nm process is not just about size; it enables higher clock speeds and better power efficiency, which is why the 4080 can push a 1290 MHz base and 1665 MHz boost clock versus the A500's 832 MHz base and 1537 MHz boost.

The compute resources are in a different league. The A500 has 2,048 shading units, 64 TMUs, 32 ROPs, 16 RT cores, and 64 tensor cores. The 4080 Mobile has 7,424 shading units (3.6x more), 232 TMUs (3.6x more), 80 ROPs (2.5x more), 58 RT cores (3.6x more), and 232 tensor cores (3.6x more). This translates to raw throughput figures: the A500 delivers 6.296 TFLOPS FP32 and FP16 (1:1), while the 4080 delivers 24.72 TFLOPS in both — a 3.9x increase. Pixel rate jumps from 49.18 GPixel/s to 133.2 GPixel/s, and texture rate from 98.37 GTexel/s to 386.3 GTexel/s.

Memory architecture is also fundamentally different. The A500 uses 4GB GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus at 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective), yielding 96.00 GB/s. The 4080 uses 12GB GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective), yielding 432.0 GB/s — exactly 4.5x the bandwidth. The 4080 also has a wider PCIe interface: x16 versus x8 on the A500, both on PCIe 4.0. The TDP difference is stark: 30W for the A500 versus 110W for the 4080, which explains the performance gap but also the thermal and power requirements.

Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API compatibility is identical. The production status differs: the A500 is end-of-life, released March 2022, while the 4080 is active, released January 2023. The A500's predecessor is the Quadro Turing-M and successor is Ada-MW, while the 4080's predecessor is GeForce 30 Mobile and successor is GeForce 50 Mobile.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the RTX 4080 Mobile in OpenCL?

A: The RTX 4080 Mobile scores 159,575 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 74.1% higher than the RTX A500 Mobile's 41,263. This means the 4080 delivers roughly four times the compute performance in this test.

Q: Does the RTX A500 Mobile win any benchmark?

A: No. In the two head-to-head tests available (Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan), the RTX 4080 Mobile wins both. The A500 has zero wins in this comparison.

Q: Why does the RTX A500 Mobile have a higher percentile rank than the RTX 4080 Mobile?

A: The A500 is in the 82nd percentile of all GPUs, while the 4080 is in the 81st percentile. This is due to the 4080's average benchmark score of 38,135 being dragged down by low Passmark scores, whereas the A500's average of 39,568 benefits from its consistent Geekbench results.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The RTX 4080 Mobile has 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth, which is 4.5 times the 96.00 GB/s of the RTX A500 Mobile. The 4080 also has 12GB of memory versus 4GB, and a 192-bit bus versus 64-bit.

Q: Are these GPUs from the same architecture?

A: No. The RTX A500 Mobile uses the Ampere architecture on an 8nm Samsung process (GA107S chip), while the RTX 4080 Mobile uses the Ada Lovelace architecture on a 5nm TSMC process (AD104 chip). The 4080 has over four times the transistor count (35,800 million vs 8,700 million).

Q: What is the TDP difference?

A: The RTX A500 Mobile has a 30W TDP, while the RTX 4080 Mobile has a 110W TDP. This is a 3.7x difference, which explains the performance gap but also means the 4080 requires more robust cooling.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the RTX 4080 Mobile is the superior performer in every measured category. Its Geekbench scores are roughly 3.9x higher, its memory bandwidth is 4.5x greater, and its compute resources are over 3.6x more numerous. If raw performance is the sole criterion, the RTX 4080 Mobile is the only choice.

However, the RTX A500 Mobile serves a different purpose. Its 30W TDP and IGP form factor make it suitable for ultra-portable professional laptops where battery life and heat dissipation are critical. The A500's 82nd percentile rank, despite being an end-of-life product, indicates it still holds its own against a wide range of GPUs. Its 4GB memory and 64-bit bus are limiting, but for basic professional tasks or as a secondary GPU, it may suffice.

The RTX 4080 Mobile, with its 110W TDP, is for high-performance gaming laptops and mobile workstations that prioritize frame rates and compute throughput over portability. Its 12GB frame buffer is better suited for modern games and AI workloads. The 4080 is also an active product with a successor already announced (GeForce 50 Mobile), while the A500 is end-of-life.

Who should pick which? If you need a GPU for demanding 3D rendering, gaming, or machine learning, the RTX 4080 Mobile is the obvious pick — the 74% performance lead is too large to ignore. If you need a low-power GPU for a thin-and-light workstation with modest graphics demands, the RTX A500 Mobile is the appropriate choice, despite its age. The 4080's 110W TDP makes it unsuitable for fanless or ultra-thin designs, while the A500's 30W TDP fits that niche perfectly.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA RTX A500 Mobile | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile |

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

| Architecture | Ampere | Ada Lovelace |

| Process Node | 8 nm (Samsung) | 5 nm (TSMC) |

| Transistors | 8,700 million | 35,800 million |

| Die Size | 200 mm² | 294 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 43.5M / mm² | 121.8M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 832 MHz | 1290 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1537 MHz | 1665 MHz |

| Memory Size | 4 GB | 12 GB |

| Memory Bus | 64 bit | 192 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 96.00 GB/s | 432.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 2048 | 7424 |

| TMUs | 64 | 232 |

| ROPs | 32 | 80 |

| RT Cores | 16 | 58 |

| Tensor Cores | 64 | 232 |

| Pixel Rate | 49.18 GPixel/s | 133.2 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 98.37 GTexel/s | 386.3 GTexel/s |

| FP32 / FP16 | 6.296 TFLOPS | 24.72 TFLOPS |

| TDP | 30 W | 110 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |

| Production Status | End-of-life | Active |

| Release Date | 2022-03-21 | 2023-01-02 |

| Chip | GA107S | AD104 |

| Memory Clock | 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective) | 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) |