CPU
GPU
RTX A2000
Popular choices:
A10G
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar RTX A2000
Performance Per Dollar A10G
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The A10G is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1% higher G3D Mark score and 200% more VRAM (24 GB vs 8 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the RTX A2000.
| Insight | RTX A2000 | A10G |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+1%) |
| Longevity | 🔮Strong Longevity (Ampere (2020−2025) / 8nm) | 🔮Strong Longevity (Ampere / 8nm) |
| Ecosystem | ✨ DLSS 2 Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | 🎮 High Capacity (8 GB) | 🎮 High Capacity (24 GB) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | Standard Size (267mm) |
💎 Value Proposition
The RTX A2000 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $320 versus $2,000 for the A10G, it costs 84% less. While it maintains competitive performance, this results in a 518.8% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | RTX A2000 | A10G |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+518.8%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($320) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($2,000) |
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of RTX A2000 and A10G
RTX A2000
The RTX A2000 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in August 10 2021. It features the Ampere architecture. The core clock ranges from 562 MHz to 1200 MHz. It has 3328 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 70W. Manufactured using 8 nm process technology. It features 26 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 13,464 points. Launch price was $449.
A10G
The A10G is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in April 12 2021. It features the Ampere architecture. The core clock ranges from 1320 MHz to 1710 MHz. It has 9216 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 150W. Manufactured using 8 nm process technology. It features 72 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 13,598 points.
Graphics Performance
The RTX A2000 scores 13,464 and the A10G reaches 13,598 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The RTX A2000 is built on Ampere while the A10G uses Ampere, both on a 8 nm process. Shader units: 3,328 (RTX A2000) vs 9,216 (A10G). Raw compute: 7.987 TFLOPS (RTX A2000) vs 31.52 TFLOPS (A10G). Boost clocks: 1200 MHz vs 1710 MHz. Ray tracing: 26 RT cores (RTX A2000) vs 72 (A10G) with 104 Tensor cores vs 288.
| Feature | RTX A2000 | A10G |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 13,464 | 13,598 |
| Architecture | Ampere | Ampere |
| Process Node | 8 nm | 8 nm |
| Shading Units | 3328 | 9216+177% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 7.987 TFLOPS | 31.52 TFLOPS+295% |
| Boost Clock | 1200 MHz | 1710 MHz+43% |
| ROPs | 48 | 96+100% |
| TMUs | 104 | 288+177% |
| L1 Cache | 3.3 MB | 9 MB+173% |
| L2 Cache | 3 MB | 6 MB+100% |
| Ray Tracing Cores | 26 | 72+177% |
| Tensor Cores | 104 | 288+177% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | RTX A2000 | A10G |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | NVIDIA Reflex | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The RTX A2000 comes with 8 GB of VRAM, while the A10G has 24 GB. The A10G offers 200% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 3 MB (RTX A2000) vs 6 MB (A10G) — the A10G has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | RTX A2000 | A10G |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 8 GB | 24 GB+200% |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 128-bit |
| L2 Cache | 3 MB | 6 MB+100% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12.2 (RTX A2000) vs 12 Ultimate (A10G). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 6 vs 0.
| Feature | RTX A2000 | A10G |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12.2+2% | 12 Ultimate |
| Vulkan | 1.3 | 1.3 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 6 | 0 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: 7th Gen NVENC (RTX A2000) vs NVENC 7th Gen (A10G). Decoder: 5th Gen NVDEC vs NVDEC 5th Gen. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 (Decode) (RTX A2000) vs AV1,H.265,H.264,VP9 (A10G).
| Feature | RTX A2000 | A10G |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | 7th Gen NVENC | NVENC 7th Gen |
| Decoder | 5th Gen NVDEC | NVDEC 5th Gen |
| Codecs | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 (Decode) | AV1,H.265,H.264,VP9 |
Power & Dimensions
The RTX A2000 draws 70W versus the A10G's 150W — a 72.7% difference. The RTX A2000 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 500W (RTX A2000) vs 500W (A10G). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 167mm vs 267mm, occupying 2 vs 1 slots. Typical load temperature: 75°C vs Unknown.
| Feature | RTX A2000 | A10G |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 70W-53% | 150W |
| Recommended PSU | 500W | 500W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 167mm | 267mm |
| Height | 68mm | 112mm |
| Slots | 2 | 1-50% |
| Temp (Load) | 75°C | Unknown-100% |
| Perf/Watt | 192.3+112% | 90.7 |
Value Analysis
The RTX A2000 launched at $450 MSRP and currently averages $320, while the A10G launched at $2500 and now averages $2000. The RTX A2000 costs 84% less ($1680 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 42.1 (RTX A2000) vs 6.8 (A10G) — the RTX A2000 offers 519.1% better value.
| Feature | RTX A2000 | A10G |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $450-82% | $2500 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $320-84% | $2000 |
| Performance per Dollar | 42.1+519% | 6.8 |
| Codename | GA106 | GA102 |
| Release | August 10 2021 | April 12 2021 |
| Ranking | #186 | #182 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on RTX A2000 and A10G
