GeForce RTX 2080 Ti vs GeForce RTX 3080: specs and benchmark comparison
Short verdict
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 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 +143.7%NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 leads in this scenario (up to 143.7% 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 RTX 2080 Ti is better2
Video memory 1 GB more11 GB vs 10 GB
Memory bus 32 bit more352 bit vs 320 bit
Where GeForce RTX 3080 is better13
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1 70.8% lower20 s vs 34 s
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1 94.6% lower11 s vs 22 s
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1 46.5% lower94 s vs 137 s
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1 115.9% lower40 s vs 86 s
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1 60.9% lower40 s vs 65 s
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1 54.6% lower22 s vs 33 s
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1 58.7% lower65 s vs 102 s
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1 39.9% lower45 s vs 63 s
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1 74.9% lower119 s vs 208 s
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1 93.9% lower54 s vs 105 s
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1 70.1% lower166 s vs 282 s
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1 92.3% lower72 s vs 138 s
Blender Benchmark 4.5.0 59.1% faster4,527 samples/min vs 2,845 samples/min
Benchmarks
Results are compared within one benchmark, one version and the same conditions.
- B ahead by 70.8%
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1
GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce RTX 2080 Ti33.9 sGeForce RTX 308019.9 sPosition among tested models (31, CUDA)
B · 20A · 340100200300Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 is ahead by 70.8% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti
33.9 s · community measurement, sample 53 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 53 submissions (8 outliers excluded), interquartile range 33.42–34.68; submissions 2021-07-15 to 2022-02-20; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080
19.9 s · community measurement, sample 293 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 293 submissions (37 outliers excluded), interquartile range 19.64–20.28; submissions 2021-07-09 to 2022-03-01; 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 94.6%
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1
GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) · s, lower is better
GeForce RTX 2080 Ti22.1 sGeForce RTX 308011.4 sPosition among tested models (20, OptiX)
B · 11A · 22050100150Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 is ahead by 94.6% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti
22.1 s · community measurement, sample 39 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 39 submissions (1 outliers excluded), interquartile range 20.82–22.62; submissions 2021-07-18 to 2022-02-25; OPTIX backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080
11.4 s · community measurement, sample 114 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 114 submissions (36 outliers excluded), interquartile range 11.26–11.53; submissions 2021-07-09 to 2022-02-28; 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 46.5%
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1
GPU, classroom (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce RTX 2080 Ti137.4 sGeForce RTX 308093.8 sPosition among tested models (26, CUDA)
B · 94A · 1370200400600800Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 is ahead by 46.5% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti
137.4 s · community measurement, sample 45 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 45 submissions (5 outliers excluded), interquartile range 133.31–141.35; submissions 2021-07-17 to 2022-02-20; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080
93.8 s · community measurement, sample 241 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 241 submissions (35 outliers excluded), interquartile range 92.51–95.41; submissions 2021-07-09 to 2022-03-01; 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 115.9%
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1
GPU, classroom (OPTIX) · s, lower is better
GeForce RTX 2080 Ti86.2 sGeForce RTX 308039.9 sPosition among tested models (14, OptiX)
B · 40A · 86050100150200Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 is ahead by 115.9% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti
86.2 s · community measurement, sample 31 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 31 submissions (3 outliers excluded), interquartile range 83.91–91.02; submissions 2021-07-18 to 2022-02-21; OPTIX backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080
39.9 s · community measurement, sample 136 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 136 submissions (6 outliers excluded), interquartile range 39.04–40.87; submissions 2021-07-09 to 2022-02-28; 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 60.9%
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1
GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce RTX 2080 Ti64.6 sGeForce RTX 308040.2 sPosition among tested models (21, CUDA)
B · 40A · 650100200300Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 is ahead by 60.9% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti
64.6 s · community measurement, sample 37 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 37 submissions (7 outliers excluded), interquartile range 63.21–66.02; submissions 2021-07-17 to 2022-02-20; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080
40.2 s · community measurement, sample 210 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 210 submissions (41 outliers excluded), interquartile range 39.77–40.76; submissions 2021-07-09 to 2022-03-01; 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 54.6%
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1
GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) · s, lower is better
GeForce RTX 2080 Ti33.5 sGeForce RTX 308021.6 sPosition among tested models (13, OptiX)
B · 22A · 33020406080Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 is ahead by 54.6% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti
33.5 s · community measurement, sample 29 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 29 submissions (2 outliers excluded), interquartile range 32.62–35.12; submissions 2021-07-18 to 2022-02-21; OPTIX backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080
21.6 s · community measurement, sample 87 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 87 submissions (33 outliers excluded), interquartile range 21.48–21.83; submissions 2021-07-09 to 2022-02-28; 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 58.7%
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1
GPU, koro (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce RTX 2080 Ti102.5 sGeForce RTX 308064.6 sPosition among tested models (20, CUDA)
B · 65A · 1020200400600Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 is ahead by 58.7% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti
102.5 s · community measurement, sample 36 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 36 submissions (6 outliers excluded), interquartile range 100.68–104.8; submissions 2021-07-17 to 2022-02-20; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080
64.6 s · community measurement, sample 212 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 212 submissions (34 outliers excluded), interquartile range 63.85–65.6; submissions 2021-07-09 to 2022-03-01; 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 39.9%
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1
GPU, koro (OPTIX) · s, lower is better
GeForce RTX 2080 Ti63.5 sGeForce RTX 308045.3 sPosition among tested models (13, OptiX)
B · 45A · 63050100150200Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 is ahead by 39.9% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti
63.5 s · community measurement, sample 24 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 24 submissions (6 outliers excluded), interquartile range 62.26–67.16; submissions 2021-07-18 to 2022-02-21; OPTIX backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080
45.3 s · community measurement, sample 103 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 103 submissions (13 outliers excluded), interquartile range 44.05–45.87; submissions 2021-07-09 to 2022-02-28; 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 74.9%
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1
GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce RTX 2080 Ti208.1 sGeForce RTX 3080119 sPosition among tested models (21, CUDA)
B · 119A · 2080200400600800Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 is ahead by 74.9% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti
208.1 s · community measurement, sample 40 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 40 submissions (4 outliers excluded), interquartile range 200.44–213.46; submissions 2021-07-17 to 2022-02-20; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080
119 s · community measurement, sample 211 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 211 submissions (34 outliers excluded), interquartile range 117.52–120.77; submissions 2021-07-09 to 2022-03-01; 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 93.9%
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1
GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) · s, lower is better
GeForce RTX 2080 Ti105.1 sGeForce RTX 308054.2 sPosition among tested models (13, OptiX)
B · 54A · 1050100200300Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 is ahead by 93.9% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti
105.1 s · community measurement, sample 38 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 38 submissions (2 outliers excluded), interquartile range 102.5–110.4; submissions 2021-07-18 to 2022-02-21; OPTIX backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080
54.2 s · community measurement, sample 102 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 102 submissions (19 outliers excluded), interquartile range 53.49–54.93; submissions 2021-07-09 to 2022-02-28; 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 70.1%
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1
GPU, victor (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce RTX 2080 Ti282 sGeForce RTX 3080165.8 sPosition among tested models (19, CUDA)
B · 166A · 28202505007501,000Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 is ahead by 70.1% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti
282 s · community measurement, sample 34 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 34 submissions (7 outliers excluded), interquartile range 274.18–287.61; submissions 2021-07-17 to 2022-02-20; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080
165.8 s · community measurement, sample 205 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 205 submissions (31 outliers excluded), interquartile range 164.1–168.46; submissions 2021-07-09 to 2022-03-01; 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 92.3%
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1
GPU, victor (OPTIX) · s, lower is better
GeForce RTX 2080 Ti137.9 sGeForce RTX 308071.7 sPosition among tested models (13, OptiX)
B · 72A · 1380100200300Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 is ahead by 92.3% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti
137.9 s · community measurement, sample 28 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 28 submissions (2 outliers excluded), interquartile range 132.73–144.53; submissions 2021-07-18 to 2022-02-21; OPTIX backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080
71.7 s · community measurement, sample 109 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 109 submissions (14 outliers excluded), interquartile range 70.08–72.69; submissions 2021-07-09 to 2022-02-28; 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 59.1%
Blender Benchmark 4.5.0
GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) · samples/min, higher is better
GeForce RTX 2080 Ti2,845.2 samples/minGeForce RTX 30804,526.6 samples/minPosition among tested models (67, OptiX)
A · 2,845B · 4,52705,00010,00015,000Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, samples/min. NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 is ahead by 59.1% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti
2,845.2 samples/min · community measurement, sample 131 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 131 submissions (5 outliers excluded), interquartile range 2732.17–2950.36; submissions 2025-07-18 to 2026-03-23; OPTIX backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080
4,526.6 samples/min · community measurement, sample 536 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 536 submissions (43 outliers excluded), interquartile range 4378.6–4702.09; submissions 2025-07-17 to 2026-09-13; 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 (43)
| Benchmark | A | B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 40.1 | 25.5 | B +57.5% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 38.8 | 21.7 | B +78.9% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 39.1 | 21.8 | B +79.9% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 19 | 10.7 | B +76.8% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 19.8 | 10.7 | B +84.2% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 151.7 | 78.1 | B +94.3% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 154.7 | 68.6 | B +125.4% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 159.2 | 65.3 | B +143.7% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | 82.1 | 41.4 | B +98.4% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | 84.2 | 39.5 | B +113% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 72.9 | 45.8 | B +59.3% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 67.6 | 39.5 | B +71.3% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 70.9 | 40.8 | B +73.7% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | 30.2 | 19.8 | B +52.3% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | 33.1 | 21.4 | B +54.6% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, koro (CUDA) | 116.5 | 68.4 | B +70.3% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, koro (CUDA) | 108.6 | 68.4 | B +58.7% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, koro (CUDA) | 111.1 | 68.9 | B +61.2% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, koro (OPTIX) | 59.4 | 42.7 | B +39.3% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, koro (OPTIX) | 98.4 | 45.8 | B +114.5% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 242.3 | 145.3 | B +66.7% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 223.3 | 129.7 | B +72.1% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 225.1 | 130 | B +73.2% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | 98 | 53.6 | B +82.9% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | 100.2 | 53 | B +89.3% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, victor (CUDA) | 277.9 | 191.6 | B +45.1% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, victor (CUDA) | 270.2 | 150.7 | B +79.3% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, victor (CUDA) | 330 | 207.5 | B +59.1% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, victor (OPTIX) | 116.6 | 60.7 | B +92.3% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, victor (OPTIX) | 137.1 | 70.9 | B +93.4% |
| Blender Benchmark 4.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 2,799.5 | 4,450.1 | B +59% |
| Blender Benchmark 5.1.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 2,835.9 | 4,379.9 | B +54.4% |
| Blender Benchmark 3.0.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 3,373.2 | 5,065.1 | B +50.2% |
| Blender Benchmark 3.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 3,084.5 | 4,893.1 | B +58.6% |
| Blender Benchmark 3.2.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 3,235.5 | 4,870.7 | B +50.5% |
| Blender Benchmark 3.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 3,223 | 5,025.1 | B +55.9% |
| Blender Benchmark 3.4.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 3,218.9 | 5,001.5 | B +55.4% |
| Blender Benchmark 3.5.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 3,362.6 | 5,251.5 | B +56.2% |
| Blender Benchmark 3.6.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 3,343.5 | 5,201.5 | B +55.6% |
| Blender Benchmark 4.0.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 2,872.1 | 4,564.4 | B +58.9% |
| Blender Benchmark 4.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 2,903.2 | 4,614.7 | B +59% |
| Blender Benchmark 4.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 2,818.4 | 4,511.6 | B +60.1% |
| Blender Benchmark 4.4.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 2,792.6 | 4,478.6 | B +60.4% |
Each benchmark version has its own scale: numbers are compared only within a row.
Reference results (79)
| Benchmark | A | B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, barbershop_interior (CUDA) | 521.2 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, barbershop_interior (CUDA) | 514 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, barbershop_interior (OPTIX) | 860.1 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, barbershop_interior (OPTIX) | 866.3 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 37.5 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 37.4 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 37.7 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 38.2 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 19.5 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 20.4 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 20.3 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 19.3 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 19.3 | 11 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 153.5 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, classroom (CUDA) | 153.6 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 147.3 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 151.1 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | 81.1 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, classroom (OPTIX) | 82.6 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | 81.4 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | 82.5 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | 84.5 | 42.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 66.4 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 67.1 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 68.4 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 71 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | 30.4 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | 31.2 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | 31.9 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | 31.4 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | 30.5 | 19.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, koro (CUDA) | 112.9 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, koro (CUDA) | 114.5 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, koro (CUDA) | 113.4 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, koro (CUDA) | 120.2 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, koro (OPTIX) | 56.1 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, koro (OPTIX) | 55.4 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, koro (OPTIX) | 53.5 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, koro (OPTIX) | 53.1 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, koro (OPTIX) | 59.2 | 42.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 234.9 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 236.4 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 234.3 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 236 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | 99.5 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | 101.3 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | 101.6 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | 99.5 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | 99.5 | 54.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, victor (CUDA) | 288.3 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, victor (CUDA) | 290 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, victor (CUDA) | 282.3 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, victor (CUDA) | 290.2 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, victor (OPTIX) | 131.2 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, victor (OPTIX) | 132.5 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, victor (OPTIX) | 129.3 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, victor (OPTIX) | 128.9 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, victor (OPTIX) | 118.1 | 62.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 2,112.4 | 2,981.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 2,233.4 | 2,902.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.4.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 2,339.9 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.5.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 2,461.2 | 3,291.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.6.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 2,495.4 | 3,193.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 4.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 2,225.7 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 4.5.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 2,330 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 5.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 2,754.3 | 4,197.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.1.2GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 3,011.2 | 5,100.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 3,108.3 | 4,851.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 5.0.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 2,627.7 | 4,105.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 5.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 2,749.3 | 4,330.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | — | 25.4 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, classroom (CUDA) | — | 96.6 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | — | 46.4 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, koro (CUDA) | — | 68.4 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | — | 139.1 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, victor (CUDA) | — | 195 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | — | 2,845.2 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 4.0.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | — | 2,989.8 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 5.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | — | 4,546.6 | no pair |
Each benchmark version has its own scale: numbers are compared only within a row.
Specifications
| Specification | A · GeForce RTX 2080 Ti | B · GeForce RTX 3080 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Chip | |||
| GPU chip | TU102-300A-K1-A1 | no data | no data for B |
| Architecture | Turing | Ampere | differs |
| Shader unitsShader unit counts are comparable only within one architecture. | 4,352 (CUDA cores) | 8,704 (CUDA cores) | not directly comparable |
| Clocks | |||
| Base clock | 1,350 MHz | 1,440 MHz | B: 90 MHz more |
| Boost clockClocks of different architectures do not reflect performance directly. For laptop chips, the clock depends on the laptop’s power limit. | 1,545 MHz | 1,710 MHz | B: 165 MHz more |
| Memory | |||
| Video memory | 11 GB | 10 GB | A: 1 GB more |
| Memory type | GDDR6 | GDDR6X | differs |
| Memory bus | 352 bit | 320 bit | A: 32 bit more |
| Memory bandwidthExcludes cache (Infinity Cache / L2), which affects effective bandwidth differently. | 616 GB/s | no data | no data for B |
| 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) | 320 W (board power) | not directly comparable |
| Recommended PSU | no data | 750 W | no data for A |
| Interface | no data | PCIe 4.0 | no data for A |
| Length (reference / Founders Edition)Partner cards have different dimensions; check the specific SKU. | no data | 285 mm | no data for A |
| Thickness (slots) | no data | 2 | no data for A |
| Power connectors (reference) | no data | 2x 8-pin (adapter to 1x 12-pin included) — Founders Edition | no data for A |
Chip
GPU chip
ATU102-300A-K1-A1
Bno data
no data for BArchitecture
ATuring
BAmpere
differsShader units
A4,352 (CUDA cores)
B8,704 (CUDA cores)
not directly comparableShader unit counts are comparable only within one architecture.
Clocks
Base clock
A1,350 MHz
B1,440 MHz
B: 90 MHz moreBoost clock
A1,545 MHz
B1,710 MHz
B: 165 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
B10 GB
A: 1 GB moreMemory type
AGDDR6
BGDDR6X
differsMemory bus
A352 bit
B320 bit
A: 32 bit moreMemory bandwidth
A616 GB/s
Bno data
no data for BExcludes cache (Infinity Cache / L2), which affects effective bandwidth differently.
Power and dimensions
Board power
A250 W (TDP)
B320 W (board power)
not directly comparableTGP (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.
Recommended PSU
Ano data
B750 W
no data for AInterface
Ano data
BPCIe 4.0
no data for ALength (reference / Founders Edition)
Ano data
B285 mm
no data for APartner cards have different dimensions; check the specific SKU.
Thickness (slots)
Ano data
B2
no data for APower connectors (reference)
Ano data
B2x 8-pin (adapter to 1x 12-pin included) — Founders Edition
no data for A
“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 RTX 2080 Ti and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 have?
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti: 11 GB GDDR6, 352-bit bus. NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080: 10 GB GDDR6X, 320-bit bus.
Which is faster: NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti or NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080?
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 leads in every scenario with comparable benchmarks: rendering and compute. This does not imply an advantage in tasks without benchmarks.
See also
Data sources (3)
- Wikipedia (English) — specifications of NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti, release date and launch pricechecked November 14, 2026
- NVIDIA — specifications of NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080checked November 7, 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 2.90.1, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.1.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.3.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.4.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.5.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.6.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.1.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.5.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.2.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.0.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.2.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 5.1.1, benchmark Blender Benchmark 5.2.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.0.1, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.1.2, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.2.1, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.3.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.4.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 5.0.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 5.1.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 5.3.0checked November 14, 2026
How we compare: methodology. Where the data comes from: sources.