GeForce RTX 3080 vs GeForce RTX 3090: specs and benchmark comparison
BNVIDIA · Ampere
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090
- 24 GB GDDR6X
- 350 W
- PSU 750 W+
September 24, 2020 · $1,499 at launch
Rendering and compute
depends on the taskBenchmark results disagree, so the choice depends on the specific task.
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 3080 is better1
Board power 30 W lower320 W (board power) vs 350 W (board power)
Where GeForce RTX 3090 is better16
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1 17.3% lower17 s vs 20 s
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1 22% lower9 s vs 11 s
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1 18% lower80 s vs 94 s
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1 19.3% lower33 s vs 40 s
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1 16.7% lower34 s vs 40 s
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1 20.7% lower18 s vs 22 s
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1 18.3% lower55 s vs 65 s
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1 19.5% lower38 s vs 45 s
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1 19.8% lower99 s vs 119 s
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1 20.2% lower45 s vs 54 s
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1 19.5% lower139 s vs 166 s
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1 18.7% lower60 s vs 72 s
Blender Benchmark 4.5.0 19.8% faster5,424 samples/min vs 4,527 samples/min
Shader units 1,792 more10,496 (CUDA cores) vs 8,704 (CUDA cores)
Video memory 14 GB more24 GB vs 10 GB
Memory bus 64 bit more384 bit vs 320 bit
Benchmarks
Results are compared within one benchmark, one version and the same conditions.
- B ahead by 17.3%
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1
GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce RTX 308019.9 sGeForce RTX 309016.9 sPosition among tested models (31, CUDA)
B · 17A · 200100200300Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 is ahead by 17.3% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · 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.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090
16.9 s · community measurement, sample 279 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 279 submissions (58 outliers excluded), interquartile range 16.76–17.19; 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 22%
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1
GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) · s, lower is better
GeForce RTX 308011.4 sGeForce RTX 30909.3 sPosition among tested models (20, OptiX)
B · 9A · 11050100150Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 is ahead by 22% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · 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.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090
9.3 s · community measurement, sample 244 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 244 submissions (56 outliers excluded), interquartile range 9.17–9.43; submissions 2021-07-10 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 18%
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1
GPU, classroom (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce RTX 308093.8 sGeForce RTX 309079.5 sPosition among tested models (26, CUDA)
B · 80A · 940200400600800Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 is ahead by 18% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · 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.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090
79.5 s · community measurement, sample 260 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 260 submissions (43 outliers excluded), interquartile range 78.58–81; 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 19.3%
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1
GPU, classroom (OPTIX) · s, lower is better
GeForce RTX 308039.9 sGeForce RTX 309033.5 sPosition among tested models (14, OptiX)
B · 33A · 40050100150200Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 is ahead by 19.3% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · 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.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090
33.5 s · community measurement, sample 182 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 182 submissions (15 outliers excluded), interquartile range 32.84–34.67; submissions 2021-07-10 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 16.7%
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1
GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce RTX 308040.2 sGeForce RTX 309034.4 sPosition among tested models (21, CUDA)
B · 34A · 400100200300Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 is ahead by 16.7% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · 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.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090
34.4 s · community measurement, sample 213 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 213 submissions (51 outliers excluded), interquartile range 34.13–34.9; 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 20.7%
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1
GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) · s, lower is better
GeForce RTX 308021.6 sGeForce RTX 309017.9 sPosition among tested models (13, OptiX)
B · 18A · 22020406080Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 is ahead by 20.7% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · 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.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090
17.9 s · community measurement, sample 141 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 141 submissions (40 outliers excluded), interquartile range 17.77–18.14; submissions 2021-07-10 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 18.3%
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1
GPU, koro (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce RTX 308064.6 sGeForce RTX 309054.6 sPosition among tested models (20, CUDA)
B · 55A · 650200400600Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 is ahead by 18.3% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · 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.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090
54.6 s · community measurement, sample 216 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 216 submissions (47 outliers excluded), interquartile range 54.03–55.35; 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 19.5%
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1
GPU, koro (OPTIX) · s, lower is better
GeForce RTX 308045.3 sGeForce RTX 309037.9 sPosition among tested models (13, OptiX)
B · 38A · 45050100150200Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 is ahead by 19.5% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · 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.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090
37.9 s · community measurement, sample 143 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 143 submissions (36 outliers excluded), interquartile range 37.49–38.45; submissions 2021-07-10 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 19.8%
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1
GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce RTX 3080119 sGeForce RTX 309099.3 sPosition among tested models (21, CUDA)
B · 99A · 1190200400600800Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 is ahead by 19.8% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · 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.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090
99.3 s · community measurement, sample 215 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 215 submissions (50 outliers excluded), interquartile range 98.46–100.87; 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 20.2%
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1
GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) · s, lower is better
GeForce RTX 308054.2 sGeForce RTX 309045.1 sPosition among tested models (13, OptiX)
B · 45A · 540100200300Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 is ahead by 20.2% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · 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.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090
45.1 s · community measurement, sample 145 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 145 submissions (26 outliers excluded), interquartile range 44.57–45.81; submissions 2021-07-10 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 19.5%
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1
GPU, victor (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce RTX 3080165.8 sGeForce RTX 3090138.7 sPosition among tested models (19, CUDA)
B · 139A · 16602505007501,000Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 is ahead by 19.5% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · 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.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090
138.7 s · community measurement, sample 217 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 217 submissions (43 outliers excluded), interquartile range 137.5–140.78; 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 18.7%
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1
GPU, victor (OPTIX) · s, lower is better
GeForce RTX 308071.7 sGeForce RTX 309060.4 sPosition among tested models (13, OptiX)
B · 60A · 720100200300Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 is ahead by 18.7% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · 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.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090
60.4 s · community measurement, sample 144 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 144 submissions (24 outliers excluded), interquartile range 59.46–61.01; submissions 2021-07-10 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 19.8%
Blender Benchmark 4.5.0
GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) · samples/min, higher is better
GeForce RTX 30804,526.6 samples/minGeForce RTX 30905,423.6 samples/minPosition among tested models (67, OptiX)
A · 4,527B · 5,42405,00010,00015,000Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, samples/min. NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 is ahead by 19.8% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · 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.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090
5,423.6 samples/min · community measurement, sample 596 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 596 submissions (34 outliers excluded), interquartile range 5240.15–5558.47; submissions 2025-07-17 to 2026-10-19; 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 (52)
| Benchmark | A | B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 25.5 | 21.5 | B +18.4% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 21.7 | 18.5 | B +17.2% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 21.8 | 18.5 | B +17.6% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 10.7 | 8.9 | B +20.1% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 11 | 9.2 | B +19.8% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 10.7 | 9.1 | B +18.2% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 78.1 | 70.6 | B +10.6% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 68.6 | 58.8 | B +16.7% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 65.3 | 55.5 | B +17.7% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | 41.4 | 35.2 | B +17.5% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | 42.5 | 37.1 | B +14.6% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | 39.5 | 34.4 | B +14.9% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 45.8 | 39 | B +17.2% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 39.5 | 33.9 | B +16.3% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 40.8 | 34.8 | B +17.4% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | 19.8 | 16.5 | B +20.1% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | 19.7 | 16.7 | B +18.1% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | 21.4 | 18.4 | B +16.8% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, koro (CUDA) | 68.4 | 58 | B +18% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, koro (CUDA) | 68.4 | 57.5 | B +19.1% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, koro (CUDA) | 68.9 | 58 | B +18.7% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, koro (OPTIX) | 42.7 | 36.5 | B +16.9% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, koro (OPTIX) | 42.1 | 36.3 | B +15.9% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, koro (OPTIX) | 45.8 | 57.1 | A +24.6% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 145.3 | 119.6 | B +21.5% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 129.7 | 108.5 | B +19.5% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 130 | 109.3 | B +19% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | 53.6 | 45.4 | B +18.1% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | 54.5 | 46.9 | B +16.2% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | 53 | 45.1 | B +17.6% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, victor (CUDA) | 191.6 | 159.1 | B +20.4% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, victor (CUDA) | 150.7 | 124.3 | B +21.3% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, victor (CUDA) | 207.5 | 178.3 | B +16.4% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, victor (OPTIX) | 60.7 | 52.8 | B +15% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, victor (OPTIX) | 62.7 | 53.9 | B +16.3% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, victor (OPTIX) | 70.9 | 62.5 | B +13.3% |
| Blender Benchmark 4.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 4,450.1 | 5,354.8 | B +20.3% |
| Blender Benchmark 5.1.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 4,379.9 | 5,253.3 | B +19.9% |
| Blender Benchmark 5.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 4,197.4 | 5,093.8 | B +21.4% |
| Blender Benchmark 3.0.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 5,065.1 | 5,841.8 | B +15.3% |
| Blender Benchmark 3.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 4,893.1 | 6,560.4 | B +34.1% |
| Blender Benchmark 3.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 4,851.8 | 6,566.2 | B +35.3% |
| Blender Benchmark 3.2.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 4,870.7 | 5,625.7 | B +15.5% |
| Blender Benchmark 3.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 5,025.1 | 6,018.2 | B +19.8% |
| Blender Benchmark 3.4.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 5,001.5 | 6,014.6 | B +20.3% |
| Blender Benchmark 3.5.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 5,251.5 | 6,296.9 | B +19.9% |
| Blender Benchmark 3.6.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 5,201.5 | 6,305.5 | B +21.2% |
| Blender Benchmark 4.0.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 4,564.4 | 5,536.1 | B +21.3% |
| Blender Benchmark 4.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 4,614.7 | 5,536.4 | B +20% |
| Blender Benchmark 4.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 4,511.6 | 5,347.6 | B +18.5% |
| Blender Benchmark 4.4.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 4,478.6 | 5,333 | B +19.1% |
| Blender Benchmark 5.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 4,330.8 | 5,266.1 | B +21.6% |
Each benchmark version has its own scale: numbers are compared only within a row.
Reference results (28)
| Benchmark | A | B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 25.4 | 20.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 96.6 | 67.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 46.4 | 37.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, koro (CUDA) | 68.4 | 57.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 139.1 | 108.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, victor (CUDA) | 195 | 148.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 2,981.3 | 3,418.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 2,845.2 | 3,138.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 2,902.8 | 3,729.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.5.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 3,291.3 | 3,864 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.6.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 3,193.9 | 4,060.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 4.0.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 2,989.8 | 3,724.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.1.2GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 5,100.4 | 5,826.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 5.0.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 4,105.5 | 4,875.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 5.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 4,546.6 | 5,143.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | — | 8.9 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | — | 38.9 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | — | 16.8 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, koro (OPTIX) | — | 37.1 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | — | 46.6 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, victor (OPTIX) | — | 57.7 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.0.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | — | 3,696.5 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.2.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | — | 3,448.2 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.4.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | — | 3,797.9 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 4.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | — | 3,735.6 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 4.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | — | 3,699.3 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 4.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | — | 3,730.8 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 4.5.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | — | 3,798 | no pair |
Each benchmark version has its own scale: numbers are compared only within a row.
Specifications
| Specification | A · GeForce RTX 3080 | B · GeForce RTX 3090 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Chip | |||
| Architecture | Ampere | Ampere | equal |
| Shader unitsShader unit counts are comparable only within one architecture. | 8,704 (CUDA cores) | 10,496 (CUDA cores) | B: 1,792 more |
| Clocks | |||
| Base clock | 1,440 MHz | 1,400 MHz | A: 40 MHz more |
| Boost clockClocks of different architectures do not reflect performance directly. For laptop chips, the clock depends on the laptop’s power limit. | 1,710 MHz | 1,700 MHz | A: 10 MHz more |
| Memory | |||
| Video memory | 10 GB | 24 GB | B: 14 GB more |
| Memory type | GDDR6X | GDDR6X | equal |
| Memory bus | 320 bit | 384 bit | B: 64 bit 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. | 320 W (board power) | 350 W (board power) | B: 30 W higher |
| Recommended PSU | 750 W | 750 W | equal |
| Interface | PCIe 4.0 | no data | no data for B |
| Length (reference / Founders Edition)Partner cards have different dimensions; check the specific SKU. | 285 mm | 313 mm | B: 28 mm higher |
| Thickness (slots) | 2 | 3 | B: 1 higher |
| Power connectors (reference) | 2x 8-pin (adapter to 1x 12-pin included) — Founders Edition | 2x 8-pin (adapter to 1x 12-pin included) — FE | differs |
Chip
Architecture
AAmpere
BAmpere
equalShader units
A8,704 (CUDA cores)
B10,496 (CUDA cores)
B: 1,792 moreShader unit counts are comparable only within one architecture.
Clocks
Base clock
A1,440 MHz
B1,400 MHz
A: 40 MHz moreBoost clock
A1,710 MHz
B1,700 MHz
A: 10 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
A10 GB
B24 GB
B: 14 GB moreMemory type
AGDDR6X
BGDDR6X
equalMemory bus
A320 bit
B384 bit
B: 64 bit more
Power and dimensions
Board power
A320 W (board power)
B350 W (board power)
B: 30 W higherTGP (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
A750 W
B750 W
equalInterface
APCIe 4.0
Bno data
no data for BLength (reference / Founders Edition)
A285 mm
B313 mm
B: 28 mm higherPartner cards have different dimensions; check the specific SKU.
Thickness (slots)
A2
B3
B: 1 higherPower connectors (reference)
A2x 8-pin (adapter to 1x 12-pin included) — Founders Edition
B2x 8-pin (adapter to 1x 12-pin included) — FE
differs
“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 3080 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 have?
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080: 10 GB GDDR6X, 320-bit bus. NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090: 24 GB GDDR6X, 384-bit bus.
What power supply does the manufacturer recommend?
For NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080, 750 W or more; for NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090, 750 W or more. This is a recommendation for a typical system; also check the power connectors of the specific card model.
Which is faster: NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 or NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090?
It depends on the task: rendering and compute: results disagree.
See also
Data sources (3)
- NVIDIA — specifications of NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080, specifications of NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090checked November 7, 2026
- Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation) — benchmark Blender Benchmark 2.90, benchmark Blender Benchmark 2.90.1, 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 3.4.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.5.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.6.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.0.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.1.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.2.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.3.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.5.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 5.1.1, benchmark Blender Benchmark 5.2.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.1.2, 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
- Wikipedia (English) — release date and launch pricechecked November 14, 2026
How we compare: methodology. Where the data comes from: sources.