GeForce GTX 1080 Ti vs GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER: specs and benchmark comparison
Short verdict
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER leads in every scenario with comparable benchmarks: rendering and compute. This does not imply an advantage in tasks without benchmarks.
Compare with AIRendering and compute
B +213.3%NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER leads in this scenario (up to 213.3% in comparable benchmarks).
No comparable benchmarks yet: gaming: rasterization, gaming: ray tracing, power efficiency.
Advantages
Only measured and rated values: a noticeable benchmark gap and specs where more is better.
Where GeForce GTX 1080 Ti is better2
Video memory 3 GB more11 GB vs 8 GB
Memory bus 96 bit more352 bit vs 256 bit
Where GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER is better10
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1 22% lower46 s vs 56 s
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1 117.9% lower29 s vs 63 s
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1 15.2% lower149 s vs 172 s
Blender Benchmark 2.90 135.7% lower90 s vs 213 s
Blender Benchmark 2.90 27.7% lower100 s vs 127 s
Blender Benchmark 2.90 32.7% lower163 s vs 217 s
Blender Benchmark 2.90 18.9% lower302 s vs 359 s
Blender Benchmark 2.90 27.1% lower372 s vs 472 s
Blender Benchmark 4.5.0 179.1% faster2,293 samples/min vs 821 samples/min
Memory bandwidth 11.5 GB/s more495.9 GB/s vs 484.4 GB/s
Benchmarks
Results are compared within one benchmark, one version and the same conditions.
- B ahead by 22%
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1
GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce GTX 1080 Ti56.2 sGeForce RTX 2080 SUPER46.1 sPosition among tested models (31, CUDA)
B · 46A · 560100200300Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER is ahead by 22% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti
56.2 s · community measurement, sample 76 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 76 submissions (6 outliers excluded), interquartile range 55.4–57.39; submissions 2021-07-11 to 2022-03-01; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER
46.1 s · community measurement, sample 33 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 33 submissions (3 outliers excluded), interquartile range 45.46–47.66; submissions 2021-07-11 to 2022-02-27; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
difference = |A − B| ÷ the smaller value × 100%. The 5% noticeable threshold is a UX heuristic, not statistical significance.
Render time of a single Cycles scene without synchronization. Median of submissions after filtering.
- B ahead by 117.9%
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1
GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) · s, lower is better
GeForce GTX 1080 Ti62.7 sGeForce RTX 2080 SUPER28.8 sPosition among tested models (20, OptiX)
B · 29A · 63050100150Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER is ahead by 117.9% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti
62.7 s · community measurement, sample 23 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 23 submissions (1 outliers excluded), interquartile range 60.35–64.88; submissions 2021-07-14 to 2022-02-09; OPTIX backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER
28.8 s · community measurement, sample 22 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 22 submissions (0 outliers excluded), interquartile range 27.21–29.41; submissions 2021-07-19 to 2022-02-21; OPTIX backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
difference = |A − B| ÷ the smaller value × 100%. The 5% noticeable threshold is a UX heuristic, not statistical significance.
Render time of a single Cycles scene without synchronization. Median of submissions after filtering.
- B ahead by 15.2%
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1
GPU, classroom (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce GTX 1080 Ti172 sGeForce RTX 2080 SUPER149.3 sPosition among tested models (26, CUDA)
B · 149A · 1720200400600800Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER is ahead by 15.2% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti
172 s · community measurement, sample 58 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 58 submissions (7 outliers excluded), interquartile range 169.09–175.74; submissions 2021-07-19 to 2022-03-01; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER
149.3 s · community measurement, sample 22 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 22 submissions (1 outliers excluded), interquartile range 148.22–154.89; submissions 2021-07-11 to 2022-02-21; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
difference = |A − B| ÷ the smaller value × 100%. The 5% noticeable threshold is a UX heuristic, not statistical significance.
Render time of a single Cycles scene without synchronization. Median of submissions after filtering.
- B ahead by 135.7%
Blender Benchmark 2.90
GPU, classroom (OPTIX) · s, lower is better
GeForce GTX 1080 Ti212.6 sGeForce RTX 2080 SUPER90.2 sPosition among tested models (15, OptiX)
B · 90A · 2130100200300400Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER is ahead by 135.7% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti
212.6 s · community measurement, sample 23 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 23 submissions (1 outliers excluded), interquartile range 203.94–221.54; submissions 2020-09-06 to 2022-01-26; OPTIX backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER
90.2 s · community measurement, sample 81 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 81 submissions (10 outliers excluded), interquartile range 89.4–91.43; submissions 2020-09-02 to 2021-01-31; OPTIX backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
difference = |A − B| ÷ the smaller value × 100%. The 5% noticeable threshold is a UX heuristic, not statistical significance.
Render time of a single Cycles scene without synchronization. Median of submissions after filtering.
- B ahead by 27.7%
Blender Benchmark 2.90
GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce GTX 1080 Ti127.4 sGeForce RTX 2080 SUPER99.8 sPosition among tested models (22, CUDA)
B · 100A · 1270200400600Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER is ahead by 27.7% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti
127.4 s · community measurement, sample 166 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 166 submissions (12 outliers excluded), interquartile range 124.67–130.48; submissions 2020-09-02 to 2021-01-27; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER
99.8 s · community measurement, sample 121 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 121 submissions (25 outliers excluded), interquartile range 97.95–101.06; submissions 2020-09-02 to 2021-02-01; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
difference = |A − B| ÷ the smaller value × 100%. The 5% noticeable threshold is a UX heuristic, not statistical significance.
Render time of a single Cycles scene without synchronization. Median of submissions after filtering.
- B ahead by 32.7%
Blender Benchmark 2.90
GPU, koro (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce GTX 1080 Ti216.7 sGeForce RTX 2080 SUPER163.3 sPosition among tested models (22, CUDA)
B · 163A · 2170200400600800Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER is ahead by 32.7% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti
216.7 s · community measurement, sample 151 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 151 submissions (24 outliers excluded), interquartile range 213.35–220.93; submissions 2020-09-02 to 2021-01-27; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER
163.3 s · community measurement, sample 112 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 112 submissions (21 outliers excluded), interquartile range 161.87–166.92; submissions 2020-09-02 to 2021-02-01; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
difference = |A − B| ÷ the smaller value × 100%. The 5% noticeable threshold is a UX heuristic, not statistical significance.
Render time of a single Cycles scene without synchronization. Median of submissions after filtering.
- B ahead by 18.9%
Blender Benchmark 2.90
GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce GTX 1080 Ti359 sGeForce RTX 2080 SUPER301.9 sPosition among tested models (23, CUDA)
B · 302A · 35905001,0001,500Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER is ahead by 18.9% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti
359 s · community measurement, sample 157 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 157 submissions (19 outliers excluded), interquartile range 352.55–366.03; submissions 2020-09-02 to 2021-01-27; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER
301.9 s · community measurement, sample 117 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 117 submissions (17 outliers excluded), interquartile range 298.38–309.39; submissions 2020-09-02 to 2021-02-01; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
difference = |A − B| ÷ the smaller value × 100%. The 5% noticeable threshold is a UX heuristic, not statistical significance.
Render time of a single Cycles scene without synchronization. Median of submissions after filtering.
- B ahead by 27.1%
Blender Benchmark 2.90
GPU, victor (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce GTX 1080 Ti472.4 sGeForce RTX 2080 SUPER371.7 sPosition among tested models (20, CUDA)
B · 372A · 47205001,0001,500Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER is ahead by 27.1% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti
472.4 s · community measurement, sample 155 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 155 submissions (17 outliers excluded), interquartile range 463.04–482.59; submissions 2020-09-02 to 2021-01-27; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER
371.7 s · community measurement, sample 111 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 111 submissions (18 outliers excluded), interquartile range 366.17–380.44; submissions 2020-09-02 to 2021-02-01; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
difference = |A − B| ÷ the smaller value × 100%. The 5% noticeable threshold is a UX heuristic, not statistical significance.
Render time of a single Cycles scene without synchronization. Median of submissions after filtering.
- B ahead by 179.1%
Blender Benchmark 4.5.0
GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) · samples/min, higher is better
GeForce GTX 1080 Ti821.4 samples/minGeForce RTX 2080 SUPER2,292.6 samples/minPosition among tested models (67, OptiX)
A · 821B · 2,29305,00010,00015,000Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, samples/min. NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER is ahead by 179.1% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti
821.4 samples/min · community measurement, sample 57 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 57 submissions (6 outliers excluded), interquartile range 808.6–840.55; submissions 2025-07-18 to 2026-03-07; OPTIX backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER
2,292.6 samples/min · community measurement, sample 40 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 40 submissions (3 outliers excluded), interquartile range 2221.12–2330.97; submissions 2025-07-24 to 2026-09-26; OPTIX backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
difference = |A − B| ÷ the smaller value × 100%. The 5% noticeable threshold is a UX heuristic, not statistical significance.
Cycles render in Blender Benchmark. Median of the sum of samples per minute over three scenes after removing outliers.
Other comparable benchmarks (32)
| Benchmark | A | B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 63.2 | 49.9 | B +26.7% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 62.2 | 50.6 | B +23.1% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 64.1 | 50.7 | B +26.5% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 69.9 | 55.6 | B +25.7% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 64.3 | 53.2 | B +20.8% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 61.2 | 25.1 | B +143.6% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, classroom (CUDA) | 192.2 | 163.2 | B +17.8% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 192.3 | 158.6 | B +21.2% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 194.8 | 159.1 | B +22.5% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 197.9 | 163.3 | B +21.2% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 121.3 | 88 | B +37.9% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 123.4 | 90.8 | B +35.9% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 124.1 | 92.8 | B +33.7% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, koro (CUDA) | 248.4 | 150.6 | B +64.9% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, koro (CUDA) | 245.2 | 149.5 | B +64% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, koro (CUDA) | 236 | 156.7 | B +50.6% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 330.5 | 283.9 | B +16.4% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 329.7 | 284.6 | B +15.9% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 337.5 | 283.5 | B +19% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, victor (CUDA) | 491.8 | 380.6 | B +29.2% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, victor (CUDA) | 487.7 | 372 | B +31.1% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, victor (CUDA) | 478.1 | 376.7 | B +26.9% |
| Blender Benchmark 4.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 821.5 | 2,234.5 | B +172% |
| Blender Benchmark 3.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 868 | 2,431.9 | B +180.2% |
| Blender Benchmark 3.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 878.4 | 2,485.1 | B +182.9% |
| Blender Benchmark 3.4.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 879.8 | 2,462.5 | B +179.9% |
| Blender Benchmark 3.5.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 889.7 | 2,644.5 | B +197.2% |
| Blender Benchmark 3.6.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 889.8 | 2,634.8 | B +196.1% |
| Blender Benchmark 4.0.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 830.7 | 2,282.1 | B +174.7% |
| Blender Benchmark 4.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 842.2 | 2,327.6 | B +176.4% |
| Blender Benchmark 4.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 829 | 2,253.2 | B +171.8% |
| Blender Benchmark 4.4.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 820.8 | 2,571.2 | B +213.3% |
Each benchmark version has its own scale: numbers are compared only within a row.
Reference results (90)
| Benchmark | A | B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, barbershop_interior (CUDA) | 529.5 | 518.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, barbershop_interior (CUDA) | 532.3 | 522.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 62.5 | 50.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 65.4 | 51.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 61.8 | 25.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 61.3 | 26.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 189.1 | 160.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 193.9 | 165.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 185 | 166.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | 216.5 | 91.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | 221.1 | 94 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | 221.4 | 95.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 119.6 | 87 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 122.4 | 89.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 119.1 | 96.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 124.3 | 90.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | 115.4 | 39.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | 115.5 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | 119.4 | 44.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | 117.4 | 44.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, koro (CUDA) | 245.9 | 149.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, koro (CUDA) | 214.6 | 150.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, koro (CUDA) | 213.3 | 155.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, koro (CUDA) | 220.4 | 147.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, koro (OPTIX) | 132.1 | 80.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, koro (OPTIX) | 133.7 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, koro (OPTIX) | 172.2 | 139.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, koro (OPTIX) | 135.1 | 86 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 331 | 282.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 341.4 | 277.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 334.7 | 279 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 310.6 | 253.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | 330.9 | 118.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | 326.6 | 120.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | 333.8 | 122.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | 334.1 | 127.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, victor (CUDA) | 493.3 | 378.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, victor (CUDA) | 460.2 | 356.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, victor (CUDA) | 521.5 | 432 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, victor (CUDA) | 521.3 | 385.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, victor (OPTIX) | 447.9 | 132.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, victor (OPTIX) | 436.1 | 134.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, victor (OPTIX) | 480.3 | 165 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, victor (OPTIX) | 462.5 | 159.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.0.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 936.1 | 1,755.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 873.8 | 1,631.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 895.1 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.2.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 976.1 | 1,646.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 931.9 | 1,769.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.5.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 928.2 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.6.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 960.5 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 4.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 886.4 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 4.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 905.1 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 4.4.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 925.1 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 4.5.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 969.1 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 5.1.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 685.3 | 2,171.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 5.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 699.6 | 2,202.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.0.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 935.9 | 2,537.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.1.2GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 780.2 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 888.7 | 2,425.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.2.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 883.9 | 2,430.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 5.0.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 726.9 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 5.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 695.2 | 2,168.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, barbershop_interior (OPTIX) | — | 917.2 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, barbershop_interior (OPTIX) | — | 885.7 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | — | 28.1 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | — | 25.4 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | — | 25.4 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | — | 25.2 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | — | 96.2 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, classroom (OPTIX) | — | 91.2 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | — | 90.8 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | — | 90.1 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | — | 40.4 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | — | 38.5 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | — | 39.6 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | — | 38.8 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, koro (OPTIX) | — | 71.4 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, koro (OPTIX) | — | 68.3 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, koro (OPTIX) | — | 67.7 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, koro (OPTIX) | — | 67 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | — | 129.1 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | — | 119.3 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | — | 123.3 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | — | 120.5 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, victor (OPTIX) | — | 409.6 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, victor (OPTIX) | — | 194.8 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, victor (OPTIX) | — | 141.5 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, victor (OPTIX) | — | 140.8 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.4.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | — | 1,667.7 | no pair |
Each benchmark version has its own scale: numbers are compared only within a row.
Specifications
| Specification | A · GeForce GTX 1080 Ti | B · GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Chip | |||
| GPU chip | GP102-350-K1-A1 | TU104-450-A1 | differs |
| Architecture | Pascal | Turing | differs |
| Shader unitsShader unit counts are comparable only within one architecture. | 3,584 (CUDA cores) | 3,072 (CUDA cores) | not directly comparable |
| Clocks | |||
| Base clock | 1,481 MHz | 1,650 MHz | B: 169 MHz more |
| Boost clockClocks of different architectures do not reflect performance directly. For laptop chips, the clock depends on the laptop’s power limit. | 1,582 MHz | 1,815 MHz | B: 233 MHz more |
| Memory | |||
| Video memory | 11 GB | 8 GB | A: 3 GB more |
| Memory type | GDDR5X | GDDR6 | differs |
| Memory bus | 352 bit | 256 bit | A: 96 bit more |
| Memory bandwidthExcludes cache (Infinity Cache / L2), which affects effective bandwidth differently. | 484.4 GB/s | 495.9 GB/s | B: 11.5 GB/s more |
| Power and dimensions | |||
| Board powerTGP (NVIDIA) and TBP (AMD/Intel) are calculated differently; higher is not better. For laptops, the chip maker sets the range and the laptop maker picks the value, so the same chip behaves differently in different laptops. | 250 W (TDP) | 250 W (TDP) | equal |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | no data | no data for B |
Chip
GPU chip
AGP102-350-K1-A1
BTU104-450-A1
differsArchitecture
APascal
BTuring
differsShader units
A3,584 (CUDA cores)
B3,072 (CUDA cores)
not directly comparableShader unit counts are comparable only within one architecture.
Clocks
Base clock
A1,481 MHz
B1,650 MHz
B: 169 MHz moreBoost clock
A1,582 MHz
B1,815 MHz
B: 233 MHz moreClocks of different architectures do not reflect performance directly. For laptop chips, the clock depends on the laptop’s power limit.
Memory
Video memory
A11 GB
B8 GB
A: 3 GB moreMemory type
AGDDR5X
BGDDR6
differsMemory bus
A352 bit
B256 bit
A: 96 bit moreMemory bandwidth
A484.4 GB/s
B495.9 GB/s
B: 11.5 GB/s moreExcludes cache (Infinity Cache / L2), which affects effective bandwidth differently.
Power and dimensions
Board power
A250 W (TDP)
B250 W (TDP)
equalTGP (NVIDIA) and TBP (AMD/Intel) are calculated differently; higher is not better. For laptops, the chip maker sets the range and the laptop maker picks the value, so the same chip behaves differently in different laptops.
Interface
APCIe 3.0 x16
Bno data
no data for B
“More” does not always mean “better”: higher power draw or size is a system requirement, not an advantage (such bars are dimmed).
Compare with AI
An AI model reviews the specs and benchmarks of this pair and gives a plain-language verdict on who each model suits.
Questions and answers
How much video memory do NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER have?
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti: 11 GB GDDR5X, 352-bit bus. NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER: 8 GB GDDR6, 256-bit bus.
Which is faster: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti or NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER?
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER leads in every scenario with comparable benchmarks: rendering and compute. This does not imply an advantage in tasks without benchmarks.
See also
Data sources (2)
- Wikipedia (English) — specifications of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti, specifications of NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER, release date and launch pricechecked November 14, 2026
- Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation) — benchmark Blender Benchmark 2.81, benchmark Blender Benchmark 2.81a, benchmark Blender Benchmark 2.82, benchmark Blender Benchmark 2.83, benchmark Blender Benchmark 2.90, benchmark Blender Benchmark 2.91.2, benchmark Blender Benchmark 2.92, benchmark Blender Benchmark 2.93.1, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.0.1, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.1.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.2.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.2.1, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.3.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.5.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.6.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.1.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.2.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.4.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.5.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.4.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 5.1.1, benchmark Blender Benchmark 5.2.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.1.2, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.0.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.3.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 5.0.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 5.1.0checked November 14, 2026
How we compare: methodology. Where the data comes from: sources.