OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Graphics cards Methodology v3.0
Graphics cards Methodology v3.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Graphics cards Methodology v3.0: the technical score from the specifications is the base, and independent expert and video reviews (up to ±0.5 points), owner opinions (up to ±0.3) and best-of lists (up to +0.3) move it up or down.
Explore Graphics cards Methodology v3.0

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 12GB review: 117 specs compared

Avg. price:~£970VRAM:12 GBMemory bus width:192 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):285 W

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 12GB Review: Compare 117 technical specifications to see how this product ranks in the Graphics cards category and whether it is worth buying.

7.7/10

Overall score

Score
7.7/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, expert reviews, best-of lists and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 40%, Reviews score 25%, List score 25%, Sentiment score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 60% of models
Score components

40%

7.9

Technical score

25%

?

Reviews scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.6, the mark of a weaker model in this category

25%

?

List scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.5, the mark of a weaker model in this category

10%

7.8

Sentiment score

â–²Better than 60% of graphics cards
7.0

Value for money

Value for money
7.0/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 75% of models
Score components

70%

7.7

Overall score

30%

5.4

Price

â–¼Worse than 75%
7.9

Technical score

Technical score
7.9/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 66% of models
Score components

44%

8.3

Performance

24%

6.5

Memory

12%

7.2

Power

11%

9.6

Features

5%

7.1

Design

4%

9.5

Connectivity

â–²Better than 66%
?

Reviews score

Reviews score
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
Grades by review (0)
We have not found an independent test of this model yet. Until we do, its review part counts as 7.6.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
No expert tests yet
?

List score

List score
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
How we count it
Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
Lists with this model (0)
Not in any best-of list yet, so this part counts as 7.5. Models in a list get 8 to 10.
Not in any best-of list yet
  • No image
No image
Where to buy
    N/A~ £970
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.

What owners say about the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 12GB

Based on 204 owners sharing their experience in online comments

72%positive7%mixed21%negative

Owners love the big performance gains, smooth high-resolution gaming, and efficiency; the steep price is the main frustration.

What owners dislike

  • Owners say the card costs too much for the performance, with street prices often around $1,000 to $1,800 depending on region and model.17
  • Owners say the RTX 4090 is only a modest price step up for much more performance, so some wish they had paid for the 4090 instead.3

Points mentioned by at least 3 owners, most mentioned first.

Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of graphics card NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 12GB

Technical score
Technical score
7.9/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 66% of models
Score components:

44%

8.3

Performance

24%

6.5

Memory

12%

7.2

Power

11%

9.6

Features

5%

7.1

Design

4%

9.5

Connectivity

7.9
Reviews score
7.6
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
7.0/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 75% of models
Score components:

70%

7.7

Overall score

30%

5.4

Price

7.0
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
?
3DMark Port Royal score
18,194 points
Market range: <0 points – >22.4k points
This graphics card scores 18,194 points in 3DMark Port Royal, which is higher than 81.3% of graphics cards.
PassMark (G3D) result
34,456 points
Market range: <7.7k points – >36k points
This graphics card scores 34,456 points in PassMark G3D, which is higher than 85.9% of graphics cards and equal to 0.1% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
20,389 points
Market range: <3.1k points – >26.3k points
This graphics card scores 20,389 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is higher than 80.7% of graphics cards.
FP32 performance
40.1 TFLOPS
Market range: <3.94 TFLOPS – >56.3 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 40.1 TFLOPS FP32 performance, which is higher than that of 72.6% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.1% of graphics cards.
Show more
VRAM
12 GB
Market range: <4 GB – >16 GB
This graphics card has 12 GB of VRAM, which is more than 46% of graphics cards and equal to 16% of graphics cards.
Memory type
GDDR6X
This graphics card uses GDDR6X memory, which is newer than on 57.1% of graphics cards and equal to 22.4% of graphics cards.
Memory bus width
192 bit
Market range: <128 bit – >384 bit
This graphics card uses a 192 bit memory bus, which is wider than that of 31.9% of graphics cards and equal to that of 18.7% of graphics cards.
Maximum memory bandwidth
503.8 GB/s
Market range: <168 GB/s – >960 GB/s
This graphics card reaches 503.8 GB/s memory bandwidth, which is higher than that of 54.6% of graphics cards.
Effective memory speed
21,000 MHz
Market range: <7k MHz – >28k MHz
This graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 21,000 MHz, which is faster than that of 61.2% of graphics cards and equal to that of 12.4% of graphics cards.
Show more
PCI Express (PCIe) version
4
This graphics card supports PCIe 4, which is newer than on 22.5% of graphics cards and equal to 50.5% of graphics cards.
PCIe lanes
x16
This graphics card uses x16 PCIe lanes, which is more than 24.1% of graphics cards and equal to 75.9% of graphics cards.
DirectX version
12 Ultimate
This graphics card supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, which is more advanced than on 22.8% of graphics cards and equal to 77.2% of graphics cards.
Vulkan version
1.3
This graphics card supports Vulkan 1.3, which is older than on 79.2% of graphics cards and equal to 15.6% of graphics cards.
OpenGL version
4.6
This graphics card supports OpenGL 4.6, which is more advanced than on 2% of graphics cards and equal to 98% of graphics cards.
Show more
Max displays supported
4
Market range: <4 – >4
This graphics card supports up to 4 displays, which is more than 9% of graphics cards and equal to 88.2% of graphics cards.
Max digital resolution
7680x4320
This graphics card supports a maximum digital resolution of 7680x4320, which is higher than that of 9.2% of graphics cards and equal to that of 90.9% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort outputs
3
Market range: <1 – >3
This graphics card offers 3 DisplayPort outputs, which is more than 21.7% of graphics cards and equal to 76% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort version
1.4a
This graphics card supports DisplayPort 1.4a, which is more advanced than on 19.3% of graphics cards and equal to 46.3% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort link rates
1.4 Gbps
Market range: <5.4 Gbps – >80 Gbps
This graphics card supports DisplayPort link rates up to 1.4 Gbps, which is slower than on 96.5% of graphics cards and equal to 3.6% of graphics cards.
Show more
Thermal Design Power (TDP)
285 W
Market range: <86 W – >360 W
This graphics card has a TDP of 285 W, which is higher than that of 67.6% of graphics cards and equal to that of 3.5% of graphics cards.
Power consumption while under peak load
285 W
Market range: <106 W – >365 W
This graphics card draws 285 W under peak load, which is higher than 65.6% of graphics cards and equal to 3.5% of graphics cards.
Recommended PSU wattage
700 W
Market range: <450 W – >850 W
This graphics card recommends a 700 W PSU, which is higher than that of 60.8% of graphics cards and equal to that of 4.6% of graphics cards.
Board power limit
285 W
Market range: <107 W – >400 W
This graphics card has a board power limit of 285 W, which is higher than that of 64.4% of graphics cards and equal to that of 3% of graphics cards.
PCIe power spec
285 W
Show more
Size
?
Length
310 mm
Market range: <200 mm – >337 mm
This graphics card is 310 mm long, which is longer than 68.2% of graphics cards and equal in length to 0.6% of graphics cards.
Height
112 mm
Market range: <109 mm – >146 mm
This graphics card is 112 mm tall, which is shorter than 76.6% of graphics cards and equal in height to 3.2% of graphics cards.
Slot width
3 slot/s
Market range: <2 slot/s – >3.25 slot/s
This graphics card occupies 3 slot/s, which is wider than 70.7% of graphics cards and equal in width to 16.8% of graphics cards.
Weight
?
Show more

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 12GB vs the average graphics card

246810TotalPerformanceMemoryFeaturesConnectivityPowerDesign
  • 4.2% higher boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a higher boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (2,610 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    2,610 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 20.3% higher base clock speed
    This graphics card has a higher base GPU clock than the average graphics card (2,310 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    2,310 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • 20 more compute units
    This graphics card has more compute units than the average graphics card (60 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    60 vs 40
  • 65.7% higher texture rate
    This graphics card has a higher texture rate than the average graphics card (626.4 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    626.4 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • Supports ECC memory
    This graphics card supports ECC memory, the average graphics card does not.
  • 20 more ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has more ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (60 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    60 vs 40
  • 77.4% higher FP32 performance
    This graphics card has a higher FP32 performance than the average graphics card (40.1 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.6 TFLOPS.
    40.1 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS
  • 96 more AI cores
    This graphics card has more AI cores than the average graphics card (240 vs 144). The average graphics card has 144 AI cores.
    240 vs 144
  • 4.2% higher boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a higher boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (2,610 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    2,610 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 20.3% higher base clock speed
    This graphics card has a higher base GPU clock than the average graphics card (2,310 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    2,310 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • 20 more compute units
    This graphics card has more compute units than the average graphics card (60 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    60 vs 40
  • 65.7% higher texture rate
    This graphics card has a higher texture rate than the average graphics card (626.4 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    626.4 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • 20 more ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has more ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (60 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    60 vs 40
  • 77.4% higher FP32 performance
    This graphics card has a higher FP32 performance than the average graphics card (40.1 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.6 TFLOPS.
    40.1 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS
  • 96 more AI cores
    This graphics card has more AI cores than the average graphics card (240 vs 144). The average graphics card has 144 AI cores.
    240 vs 144
  • 56 more TMUs
    This graphics card has more TMUs than the average graphics card (240 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    240 vs 184
  • 52.2% higher PassMark score
    This graphics card has a higher PassMark score than the average graphics card (34,456 points vs 22,638 points). The average graphics card has a PassMark score of 22,638 points.
    34,456 points vs 22,638 points
  • 29.4% higher pixel rate
    This graphics card has a higher pixel rate than the average graphics card (208.8 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s). The average graphics card has a pixel rate of 161.3 GPixel/s.
    208.8 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s
  • 98.9% higher ray tracing score
    This graphics card has a higher ray tracing score than the average graphics card (18,194 points vs 9,148 points). The average graphics card has a ray tracing score of 9,148 points.
    18,194 points vs 9,148 points
  • 16 more ROPs
    This graphics card has more ROPs than the average graphics card (80 vs 64). The average graphics card has 64 ROPs.
    80 vs 64
  • 2.6x higher FP64 performance
    This graphics card has a higher FP64 performance than the average graphics card (1.3 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP64 performance of 0.48 TFLOPS.
    1.25 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS
  • Supports ECC memory
    This graphics card supports ECC memory, the average graphics card does not.
  • 2x larger L2 cache
    This graphics card has more L2 cache than the average graphics card (48 MB vs 24 MB). The average graphics card has 24 MB L2 cache.
    48 MB vs 24 MB
  • 12x more Infinity Cache
    This graphics card has more Infinity Cache than the average graphics card (48 MB vs 4 MB). The average graphics card has 4 MB Infinity Cache.
    48 MB vs 4 MB
  • 10.5% faster memory speed
    This graphics card has a higher effective memory speed than the average graphics card (21,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz). The average graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 19,000 MHz.
    21,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz
  • 12.5% higher memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a higher memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (503.8 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    503.8 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • More NVENC sessions
    This graphics card has more concurrent NVENC sessions than the average graphics card (12 vs 8). The average graphics card has 8 concurrent NVENC sessions.
    12 vs 8
  • 7 °C lower idle temperature
    This graphics card has a lower idle temperature than the average graphics card (30 °C vs 37 °C). The average graphics card has an idle temperature of 37 °C.
    30 °C vs 37 °C
  • 13 mm lower card height
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (112 mm vs 125 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 125 mm.
    112 mm vs 125 mm
  • 1 fewer fans
    This graphics card has fewer fans than the average graphics card (2 vs 3).
    2 vs 3
  • No dual BIOS
    This graphics card does not include dual BIOS, the average graphics card does.
  • Less advanced frame generation
    This graphics card has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (frame generation vs multi frame generation).
    frame generation vs multi frame generation
  • 32.6% higher TDP
    This graphics card has a higher TDP than the average graphics card (285 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    285 W vs 215 W
  • 25% slower VRAM clock
    This graphics card has a lower VRAM clock than the average graphics card (1,313 MHz vs 1,750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1,750 MHz.
    1,313 MHz vs 1,750 MHz
  • 0.5 slot/s wider design
    This graphics card occupies more slots than the average graphics card (3 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s). The average graphics card occupies 2.5 slot/s.
    3 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s
  • Older Vulkan version
    This graphics card supports an older Vulkan version than the average graphics card (1.3 vs 1.4).
    1.3 vs 1.4
  • 15 °C lower thermal ceiling
    This graphics card has a lower thermal ceiling than the average graphics card (110 °C vs 95 °C). The average graphics card has a thermal ceiling of 95 °C.
    110 °C vs 95 °C
  • 86.5% more expensive
    NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 12GB is more expensive than the average graphics card (£970 vs £520).
    £970 vs £520
  • 5.9% worse value for money
    NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 12GB has worse value for money than the average graphics card (7 vs 7.4).
    7 vs 7.41
  • 1 years older
    This graphics card was released earlier than the average graphics card (2022 vs 2023).
    September 2022
    2022 vs 2023
  • 25% slower VRAM clock
    This graphics card has a lower VRAM clock than the average graphics card (1,313 MHz vs 1,750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1,750 MHz.
    1,313 MHz vs 1,750 MHz
  • Less advanced frame generation
    This graphics card has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (frame generation vs multi frame generation).
    frame generation vs multi frame generation
  • Older Vulkan version
    This graphics card supports an older Vulkan version than the average graphics card (1.3 vs 1.4).
    1.3 vs 1.4
  • Older HDMI version
    This graphics card supports an older HDMI version than the average graphics card (2.1 vs 2.1a).
    2.1 vs 2.1a
  • Older HDCP version
    This graphics card supports an older HDCP version than the average graphics card (2.2 vs 2.3).
    2.2 vs 2.3
  • 2 fewer monitors per output type
    This graphics card supports fewer monitors per output type than the average graphics card (1 vs 3). The average graphics card supports 3 monitors per output type.
    1 vs 3
  • 93.5% lower DisplayPort bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower DisplayPort bandwidth than the average graphics card (1.4 Gbps vs 21.6 Gbps). The average graphics card has DisplayPort bandwidth of 21.6 Gbps.
    1.4 Gbps vs 21.6 Gbps
  • Older NVDEC generation
    This graphics card has a lower NVDEC generation than the average graphics card (5 vs 6). The average graphics card offers NVDEC generation 6.
    5 vs 6
  • 1 fewer fans
    This graphics card has fewer fans than the average graphics card (2 vs 3).
    2 vs 3
  • No dual BIOS
    This graphics card does not include dual BIOS, the average graphics card does.
  • 32.6% higher TDP
    This graphics card has a higher TDP than the average graphics card (285 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    285 W vs 215 W
  • 15 °C lower thermal ceiling
    This graphics card has a lower thermal ceiling than the average graphics card (110 °C vs 95 °C). The average graphics card has a thermal ceiling of 95 °C.
    110 °C vs 95 °C
  • 29.5% higher board power limit
    This graphics card has a higher board power limit than the average graphics card (285 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 220 W.
    285 W vs 220 W
  • 7.7% higher PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a higher PSU requirement than the average graphics card (700 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    700 W vs 650 W
  • 0.5 slot/s wider design
    This graphics card occupies more slots than the average graphics card (3 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s). The average graphics card occupies 2.5 slot/s.
    3 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s
  • 27.8 mm longer card length
    This graphics card is longer than the average graphics card (310 mm vs 282.2 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 282.2 mm.
    310 mm vs 282.2 mm

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

Overview video
Overview video
Overview video
Overview video
Overview video
Overview video
Overview video

Third-party reviews

What customers like about NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 12GB

  • Significantly better efficiency and performance-per-watt than the previous 30-series generation
  • Strong performance in DLSS 3.0 and Ray Tracing tasks compared to older cards
  • Considered a massive upgrade for users coming from 10 or 20-series GPUs
  • Excellent for 1440p gaming at high refresh rates

What customers don't like about NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 12GB

  • Highly confusing and misleading branding, as its specs were significantly lower than the 4080 16GB
  • Poor value for money at its original proposed $899 price tag
  • Performance actually trailed behind the previous flagship RTX 3090 Ti in raw rasterization
  • Smaller 192-bit memory bus and fewer CUDA cores compared to the 'true' 4080 model
  • 12GB of VRAM considered insufficient for a high-end '80-class' card in 4K scenarios

Verdict

The Nvidia GeForce RTX 4080 12GB was a high-performance graphics card built on the Ada Lovelace architecture, featuring 7,680 CUDA cores, a 192-bit memory interface, and 12GB of GDDR6X VRAM. It delivered impressive 1440p and entry-level 4K gaming performance with a base clock of 2.31 GHz (boosting to 2.61 GHz) and support for advanced features like DLSS 3 Frame Generation and third-generation RT cores for enhanced ray tracing. Main pros included exceptional power efficiency for its performance class and access to the latest AI-driven upscaling technologies. However, it was famously 'unlaunched' by Nvidia shortly after its announcement due to significant backlash regarding its confusing branding and high $899 price tag, as it was significantly less powerful than the 16GB version; it was subsequently rebranded and released as the RTX 4070 Ti.

Compare NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 12GB with other products in the Graphics cards category

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 12GB and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found