NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M vs NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile Comparison

FAQ

Q: How does the NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile compare to the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M in overall average benchmark score?

A: The RTX A2000 Mobile has an average benchmark score of 13,821, while the GTX 780M scores 11,261. That places the RTX A2000 Mobile about 22.7% higher on average, and it sits in the 55th percentile of all GPUs versus the 50th percentile for the GTX 780M.

Q: Which GPU wins in Geekbench OpenCL, and by how much?

A: The RTX A2000 Mobile wins decisively, scoring 56,518 versus 12,769 for the GTX 780M. That is a 342.6% advantage, meaning the newer Ampere part delivers more than four times the OpenCL compute performance in this test.

Q: What about Vulkan performance?

A: The RTX A2000 Mobile again dominates, with a score of 53,146 against 12,696 for the GTX 780M. The delta is 318.6%, so the RTX A2000 Mobile is roughly 4.2 times faster in this API workload.

Q: Are there any benchmark tests where the GTX 780M wins?

A: No. In the recorded head-to-head tests (Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan), the RTX A2000 Mobile wins both. The wins count is 2 for the RTX A2000 Mobile and 0 for the GTX 780M.

Q: How do their nearest rivals compare in terms of average score?

A: The RTX A2000 Mobile’s closest rival is the AMD Radeon 660M at 13,812 (0.1% behind), followed by the AMD Radeon RX 570X at 13,871 (0.4% ahead) and the AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT at 13,745 (0.6% behind). The GTX 780M’s nearest rival is the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 at 11,228 (0.3% behind) and the AMD FirePro W4300 at 11,225 (0.3% behind).

Q: What are the release dates and production statuses?

A: The RTX A2000 Mobile was released on April 11, 2021, and the GTX 780M on May 10, 2013. Both are end-of-life products.

Architecture Differences

The RTX A2000 Mobile is built on the Ampere architecture using the GA107 chip, fabricated on an 8 nm process at Samsung. The GTX 780M uses the Kepler architecture with the GK104 chip, manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC. This process gap is significant: the RTX A2000 Mobile packs 8,700 million transistors into a 200 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 43.5 million per mm². The GTX 780M has 3,540 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, which comes to 12.0 million per mm². In short, the Ampere part is denser and more modern.

The RTX A2000 Mobile also introduces hardware features that the Kepler part simply lacks. It has 20 ray tracing cores and 80 tensor cores, while the GTX 780M has none of either. This means the RTX A2000 Mobile supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, whereas the GTX 780M is limited to DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.2.175. OpenGL support is identical at 4.6.

The shading architecture differs substantially. The RTX A2000 Mobile has 2,560 shading units, 80 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 48 render output units (ROPs). The GTX 780M has 1,536 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The RTX A2000 Mobile has more shaders and ROPs, but the GTX 780M has more TMUs, which explains its relatively high texture rate. The RTX A2000 Mobile’s pixel rate is 80.98 GPixel/s versus 25.50 GPixel/s for the GTX 780M, a 3.2x gap. Its texture rate is 135.0 GTexel/s versus 102.0 GTexel/s, a 32% lead. FP32 compute is 8.637 TFLOPS versus 2.448 TFLOPS, a 3.5x difference. The RTX A2000 Mobile also supports FP16 at 8.637 TFLOPS (1:1), while the GTX 780M has no recorded FP16 capability.

Memory technology also separates the two. The RTX A2000 Mobile uses 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, with a bandwidth of 192.0 GB/s. The GTX 780M uses 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, but its bandwidth is lower at 160.0 GB/s. The newer memory type and higher effective speed (12 Gbps versus 5 Gbps) allow the RTX A2000 Mobile to outpace the wider bus of the older card.

The form factor and power profile differ as well. The RTX A2000 Mobile is an integrated graphics package (IGP) with no power connectors, rated at 95 W TDP, and uses a PCIe 4.0 x16 interface. The GTX 780M is an MXM module, also with no power connectors, but its TDP is higher at 122 W and it uses an MXM-B (3.0) interface. Both have portable device dependent display outputs.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded head-to-head data covers two tests, and the RTX A2000 Mobile wins both by enormous margins. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RTX A2000 Mobile scores 56,518 against 12,769 for the GTX 780M, a 342.6% delta. In Geekbench Vulkan, the RTX A2000 Mobile scores 53,146 versus 12,696, a 318.6% delta. These are not close contests; the Ampere part is roughly 4.2 to 4.4 times faster in compute workloads.

Looking at the broader benchmark set, the RTX A2000 Mobile has additional recorded scores that the GTX 780M lacks. Its Passmark G3D score is 9,611, its Passmark G2D score is 491, and its Passmark GPU compute score is 4,334. It also has Passmark DirectX 10, 11, 12, and 9 scores of 57, 68, 47, and 115, respectively. The GTX 780M has a Geekbench Metal score of 8,319, a test that the RTX A2000 Mobile does not have recorded. This means the comparison is limited to the two shared tests, where the result is unambiguous.

The average benchmark score difference is also telling. The RTX A2000 Mobile averages 13,821, while the GTX 780M averages 11,261. The RTX A2000 Mobile’s nearest rival, the AMD Radeon 660M, is essentially tied at 13,812 (0.1% behind), while the GTX 780M’s nearest rival, the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200, is at 11,228 (0.3% behind). In percentile terms, the RTX A2000 Mobile ranks in the 55th percentile of all GPUs, versus the 50th for the GTX 780M. That is a modest overall percentile gap, but the head-to-head compute tests show a much larger gulf.

The wins tally is 2 for the RTX A2000 Mobile and 0 for the GTX 780M. No test in the database has the older Kepler part ahead.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every major specification category. The process node is 8 nm (Samsung) for the RTX A2000 Mobile versus 28 nm (TSMC) for the GTX 780M. Transistor count is 8,700 million versus 3,540 million, and die size is 200 mm² versus 294 mm². Transistor density is 43.5 million per mm² versus 12.0 million per mm².

Clock speeds differ significantly. The RTX A2000 Mobile has a base clock of 1215 MHz and a boost clock of 1687 MHz. The GTX 780M has a base clock of 771 MHz and a boost clock of 797 MHz. The RTX A2000 Mobile’s boost clock is more than double the GTX 780M’s boost clock. Memory clocks are 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective) for the RTX A2000 Mobile versus 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective) for the GTX 780M.

Memory configuration: both have 4 GB, but the RTX A2000 Mobile uses GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 192.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the GTX 780M uses GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 160.0 GB/s bandwidth. The RTX A2000 Mobile has 2,560 shading units, 80 TMUs, 48 ROPs, 20 RT cores, and 80 tensor cores. The GTX 780M has 1,536 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, with no RT or tensor cores.

Pixel rate is 80.98 GPixel/s versus 25.50 GPixel/s. Texture rate is 135.0 GTexel/s versus 102.0 GTexel/s. FP32 is 8.637 TFLOPS versus 2.448 TFLOPS. FP16 is 8.637 TFLOPS for the RTX A2000 Mobile and absent for the GTX 780M. TDP is 95 W versus 122 W. Slot width is IGP versus MXM Module. Bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x16 versus MXM-B (3.0). DirectX support is 12 Ultimate (12_2) versus 12 (11_0). Vulkan support is 1.4 versus 1.2.175.

The RTX A2000 Mobile’s predecessor is the Quadro Turing-M and its successor is Ada-MW. The GTX 780M’s predecessor is the GeForce 600M and its successor is GeForce 800M.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX A2000 Mobile wins in every recorded head-to-head benchmark. Its advantages are most pronounced in compute-heavy workloads: OpenCL and Vulkan. The 342.6% and 318.6% deltas indicate that the Ampere architecture, with its tensor cores, RT cores, and higher shader count, is in a different performance class. For tasks that rely on FP32 compute, ray tracing, or tensor operations, the RTX A2000 Mobile is the clear choice.

The RTX A2000 Mobile also wins on efficiency. Despite a lower TDP of 95 W versus 122 W, it delivers 8.637 TFLOPS of FP32 versus 2.448 TFLOPS. That is a 3.5x compute advantage while consuming 22% less power. This makes it suitable for thin-and-light or power-constrained mobile workstations where the GTX 780M’s higher TDP would be a liability.

The GTX 780M has no recorded benchmark wins. Its only unique strength is its higher TMU count (128 versus 80), which gives it a texture rate of 102.0 GTexel/s, but that is still 32% lower than the RTX A2000 Mobile’s 135.0 GTexel/s. The GTX 780M also has a wider memory bus (256-bit versus 128-bit), but the RTX A2000 Mobile’s GDDR6 at 12 Gbps effective still delivers higher bandwidth (192.0 GB/s versus 160.0 GB/s).

In terms of API support, the RTX A2000 Mobile is strictly ahead with DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4. The GTX 780M’s DirectX 12 (11_0) support is a generation older and lacks the feature set required for modern ray-traced or mesh-shader workloads. The RTX A2000 Mobile also has a Geekbench Metal score gap: it does not have one recorded, while the GTX 780M scores 8,319, but that is an Apple-specific API and not comparable to the OpenCL or Vulkan results.

For legacy compatibility, the GTX 780M’s Kepler architecture has no advantage in the recorded data. Its OpenGL 4.6 support matches the RTX A2000 Mobile, so there is no differentiator there.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile is the superior GPU in every measured category. It wins both head-to-head tests, has a higher average benchmark score (13,821 versus 11,261), a higher percentile rank (55th versus 50th), and a much higher specification sheet across the board. The 342.6% OpenCL lead and 318.6% Vulkan lead are not marginal improvements; they represent a generational leap in compute capability.

For users seeking a mobile GPU for compute-heavy tasks such as OpenCL or Vulkan workloads, the RTX A2000 Mobile is the only rational choice. Its 95 W TDP makes it more power-efficient than the GTX 780M’s 122 W, and its support for DirectX 12 Ultimate, ray tracing cores, and tensor cores means it is future-proof for modern graphics APIs. The GTX 780M, released in 2013, is a legacy part with no recorded wins and no modern feature support.

The GTX 780M does have one nominal specification advantage: 128 TMUs versus 80, and a 256-bit memory bus versus 128-bit. However, the RTX A2000 Mobile’s higher texture rate (135.0 GTexel/s versus 102.0 GTexel/s) and higher bandwidth (192.0 GB/s versus 160.0 GB/s) negate both. The wider bus does not compensate for the older GDDR5 memory.

Who should pick the GTX 780M? Only a user with a specific MXM-B 3.0 slot and no ability to upgrade to a newer interface, or someone running software that requires a Kepler-era driver quirk. The recorded data offers no performance reason to choose it. The RTX A2000 Mobile is the pick for anyone who needs compute performance, modern API support, or lower power draw. The verdict is clear: the RTX A2000 Mobile wins 2-0 in head-to-head tests, and its overall benchmark average is 22.7% higher. There is no contest in the database.