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 RTX 3000 Ada Generation Laptop review: 117 specs compared

Avg. price:~£2,510VRAM:8 GBMemory bus width:128 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):75 W

NVIDIA RTX 3000 Ada Generation Laptop Review: Compare 117 technical specifications to see how this product ranks in the Graphics cards category and whether it is worth buying.

6.9/10

Overall score

Score
6.9/ 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–¼ Worse than 70% of models
Score components

40%

5.8

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%

?

Sentiment scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.8, the mark of a weaker model in this category

â–¼Worse than 70% of graphics cards
5.1

Value for money

Value for money
5.1/ 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 99% of models
Score components

70%

6.9

Overall score

30%

1.0

Price

â–¼Worse than 99%
5.8

Technical score

Technical score
5.8/ 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–¼ Worse than 75% of models
Score components

44%

4.5

Performance

24%

4.0

Memory

12%

9.2

Power

11%

9.7

Features

5%

7.6

Design

4%

9.4

Connectivity

â–¼Worse than 75%
?

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~ £2,510
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of graphics card NVIDIA RTX 3000 Ada Generation Laptop

Technical score
Technical score
5.8/ 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–¼ Worse than 75% of models
Score components:

44%

4.5

Performance

24%

4.0

Memory

12%

9.2

Power

11%

9.7

Features

5%

7.6

Design

4%

9.4

Connectivity

5.8
Reviews score
7.6
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
5.1/ 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 99% of models
Score components:

70%

6.9

Overall score

30%

1.0

Price

5.1
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
9,034 points
Market range: <4.1k points – >30.1k points
This graphics card scores 9,034 points in 3DMark Time Spy, which is lower than 74.4% of graphics cards.
3DMark Port Royal score
5,210 points
Market range: <0 points – >22.4k points
This graphics card scores 5,210 points in 3DMark Port Royal, which is lower than 71.5% of graphics cards.
PassMark (G3D) result
15,897 points
Market range: <7.7k points – >36k points
This graphics card scores 15,897 points in PassMark G3D, which is lower than 73.6% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
6,311 points
Market range: <3.1k points – >26.3k points
This graphics card scores 6,311 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is lower than 77.9% of graphics cards.
FP32 performance
19.9 TFLOPS
Market range: <3.94 TFLOPS – >56.3 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 19.9 TFLOPS FP32 performance, which is lower than that of 57.3% of graphics cards.
Show more
VRAM
8 GB
Market range: <4 GB – >16 GB
This graphics card has 8 GB of VRAM, which is less than 56.8% of graphics cards and equal to 25.7% of graphics cards.
Memory type
GDDR6
This graphics card uses GDDR6 memory, which is newer than on 16.4% of graphics cards and equal to 40.3% of graphics cards.
Memory bus width
128 bit
Market range: <128 bit – >384 bit
This graphics card uses a 128 bit memory bus, which is narrower than that of 68.6% of graphics cards and equal to that of 26.7% of graphics cards.
Maximum memory bandwidth
256 GB/s
Market range: <168 GB/s – >960 GB/s
This graphics card reaches 256 GB/s memory bandwidth, which is lower than that of 80% of graphics cards and equal to that of 2.8% of graphics cards.
Effective memory speed
16,000 MHz
Market range: <7k MHz – >28k MHz
This graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 16,000 MHz, which is slower than that of 63.3% of graphics cards and equal to that of 4.3% 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
1.4
This graphics card supports Vulkan 1.4, which is more advanced than on 20.8% of graphics cards and equal to 79.2% 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
4
Market range: <1 – >3
This graphics card offers 4 DisplayPort outputs, which is more than 97.8% of graphics cards and equal to 2.1% 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
32 Gbps
Market range: <5.4 Gbps – >80 Gbps
This graphics card supports DisplayPort link rates up to 32 Gbps, which is faster than on 56.5% of graphics cards and equal to 0.1% of graphics cards.
Show more
Thermal Design Power (TDP)
75 W
Market range: <86 W – >360 W
This graphics card has a TDP of 75 W, which is lower than that of 90.4% of graphics cards and equal to that of 2.6% of graphics cards.
Power consumption while under peak load
140 W
Market range: <106 W – >365 W
This graphics card draws 140 W under peak load, which is lower than 79.5% of graphics cards and equal to 0.6% of graphics cards.
Recommended PSU wattage
115 W
Market range: <450 W – >850 W
This graphics card recommends a 115 W PSU, which is lower than that of 100% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.1% of graphics cards.
Board power limit
115 W
Market range: <107 W – >400 W
This graphics card has a board power limit of 115 W, which is lower than that of 87.3% of graphics cards and equal to that of 2.2% of graphics cards.
PCIe power spec
35 W
Show more
Size
?
Length
?
Height
?
Slot width
?
Weight
?
Show more

NVIDIA RTX 3000 Ada Generation Laptop vs the average graphics card

246810TotalPerformanceMemoryFeaturesConnectivityPowerDesign
  • 82.3% lower PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a lower PSU requirement than the average graphics card (115 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    115 W vs 650 W
  • 65.1% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (75 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    75 W vs 215 W
  • Supports ECC memory
    This graphics card supports ECC memory, the average graphics card does not.
  • 1 more DisplayPort outputs
    This graphics card has more DisplayPort outputs than the average graphics card (4 vs 3). The average graphics card has 3 DisplayPort outputs.
    4 vs 3
  • 14.3% faster VRAM clock
    This graphics card has a higher VRAM clock than the average graphics card (2000 MHz vs 1,750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1,750 MHz.
    2,000 MHz vs 1,750 MHz
  • 47.7% lower board power limit
    This graphics card has a lower board power limit than the average graphics card (115 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 220 W.
    115 W vs 220 W
  • 8 °C higher thermal ceiling
    This graphics card has a higher thermal ceiling than the average graphics card (87 °C vs 95 °C). The average graphics card has a thermal ceiling of 95 °C.
    87 °C vs 95 °C
  • Supports virtual GPU
    This graphics card supports virtual GPU features, the average graphics card does not.
  • Supports ECC memory
    This graphics card supports ECC memory, the average graphics card does not.
  • 14.3% faster VRAM clock
    This graphics card has a higher VRAM clock than the average graphics card (2000 MHz vs 1,750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1,750 MHz.
    2,000 MHz vs 1,750 MHz
  • Supports virtual GPU
    This graphics card supports virtual GPU features, the average graphics card does not.
  • 1 more DisplayPort outputs
    This graphics card has more DisplayPort outputs than the average graphics card (4 vs 3). The average graphics card has 3 DisplayPort outputs.
    4 vs 3
  • More NVENC sessions
    This graphics card has more concurrent NVENC sessions than the average graphics card (Unlimited vs 8). The average graphics card has 8 concurrent NVENC sessions.
    Unlimited vs 8
  • 82.3% lower PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a lower PSU requirement than the average graphics card (115 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    115 W vs 650 W
  • 65.1% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (75 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    75 W vs 215 W
  • 47.7% lower board power limit
    This graphics card has a lower board power limit than the average graphics card (115 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 220 W.
    115 W vs 220 W
  • 8 °C higher thermal ceiling
    This graphics card has a higher thermal ceiling than the average graphics card (87 °C vs 95 °C). The average graphics card has a thermal ceiling of 95 °C.
    87 °C vs 95 °C
  • 58.3% lower idle power draw
    This graphics card has a lower idle power draw than the average graphics card (5 W vs 12 W). The average graphics card has an idle power draw of 12 W.
    5 W vs 12 W
  • 32.3% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,695 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    1,695 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 4 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (8 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    8 GB vs 12 GB
  • 27.3% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,395 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    1,395 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • 55.6% lower texture rate
    This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (168 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    168 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • 49.6% lower pixel rate
    This graphics card has a lower pixel rate than the average graphics card (81.4 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s). The average graphics card has a pixel rate of 161.3 GPixel/s.
    81.36 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s
  • No dual BIOS
    This graphics card does not include dual BIOS, the average graphics card does.
  • 64 bit narrower memory bus
    This graphics card has a narrower memory bus than the average graphics card (128 bit vs 192 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 192 bit.
    128 bit vs 192 bit
  • 42.9% lower memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (256 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    256 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • 4.83x more expensive
    NVIDIA RTX 3000 Ada Generation Laptop is more expensive than the average graphics card (£2,510 vs £520).
    £2,510 vs £520
  • 44.9% worse value for money
    NVIDIA RTX 3000 Ada Generation Laptop has worse value for money than the average graphics card (5.12 vs 7.4).
    5.12 vs 7.41
  • 32.3% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,695 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    1,695 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 27.3% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,395 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    1,395 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • 55.6% lower texture rate
    This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (168 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    168 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • 49.6% lower pixel rate
    This graphics card has a lower pixel rate than the average graphics card (81.4 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s). The average graphics card has a pixel rate of 161.3 GPixel/s.
    81.36 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s
  • 16 fewer ROPs
    This graphics card has fewer ROPs than the average graphics card (48 vs 64). The average graphics card has 64 ROPs.
    48 vs 64
  • 40 fewer TMUs
    This graphics card has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (144 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    144 vs 184
  • 4 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (36 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    36 vs 40
  • 29.8% lower PassMark score
    This graphics card has a lower PassMark score than the average graphics card (15,897 points vs 22,638 points). The average graphics card has a PassMark score of 22,638 points.
    15,897 points vs 22,638 points
  • 38.9% lower gaming score
    This graphics card has a lower gaming score than the average graphics card (9,034 points vs 14,779 points). The average graphics card has a gaming score of 14,779 points.
    9,034 points vs 14,779 points
  • 43% lower ray tracing score
    This graphics card has a lower ray tracing score than the average graphics card (5,210 points vs 9,148 points). The average graphics card has a ray tracing score of 9,148 points.
    5,210 points vs 9,148 points
  • 4 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (36 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    36 vs 40
  • 11.9% lower FP32 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP32 performance than the average graphics card (19.9 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.6 TFLOPS.
    19.9 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS
  • 50% lower FP64 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP64 performance than the average graphics card (0.2 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP64 performance of 0.48 TFLOPS.
    0.24 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS
  • 47.7% lower compute score
    This graphics card has a lower compute score than the average graphics card (6,311 points vs 12,70.5 points). The average graphics card has a compute score of 12,070.5 points.
    6,311 points vs 12,070.5 points
  • 4 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (8 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    8 GB vs 12 GB
  • 64 bit narrower memory bus
    This graphics card has a narrower memory bus than the average graphics card (128 bit vs 192 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 192 bit.
    128 bit vs 192 bit
  • 42.9% lower memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (256 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    256 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • 15.8% slower memory speed
    This graphics card has a lower effective memory speed than the average graphics card (16,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz). The average graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 19,000 MHz.
    16,000 MHz vs 19,000 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 shader model
    This graphics card supports an older shader model than the average graphics card (6.7 vs 6.8).
    6.7 vs 6.8
  • 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 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
  • No dual BIOS
    This graphics card does not include dual BIOS, the average graphics card does.
  • 13 °C higher load temperature
    This graphics card has a higher load temperature than the average graphics card (80 °C vs 67 °C). The average graphics card has a load temperature of 67 °C.
    80 °C vs 67 °C
  • 10.6 dB noisier under load
    This graphics card has a higher load noise level than the average graphics card (46 dB vs 35.4 dB). The average graphics card has a load noise level of 35.4 dB.
    46 dB vs 35.4 dB
  • 33 dB noisier at idle
    This graphics card has a higher idle noise level than the average graphics card (33 dB vs 0 dB). The average graphics card has an idle noise level of 0 dB.
    33 dB vs 0 dB
  • No backplate
    This graphics card does not include a backplate, the average graphics card does.
  • No RGB lighting
    This graphics card does not include RGB lighting, the average graphics card does.

Video reviews

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

Not graded

Third-party reviews

What customers like about NVIDIA RTX 3000 Ada Generation Laptop

  • Excellent for professional workloads like CAD, scientific computing, and rendering due to certified workstation drivers.
  • Supports Error-Correcting Code (ECC) memory, which is essential for preventing data corruption in high-stakes professional applications.
  • Impressive energy efficiency and thermal management thanks to the advanced 5 nm (TSMC 4N) manufacturing process.
  • Strong workstation performance that can outperform mid-range consumer GPUs like the RTX 4060 Mobile in specific professional scenarios.
  • Capable 1080p gaming performance, reaching over 60 FPS in demanding titles like Cyberpunk 2077 on high settings.

What customers don't like about NVIDIA RTX 3000 Ada Generation Laptop

  • Significantly higher price point compared to consumer-grade GPUs with similar raw gaming power, such as the RTX 4070.
  • Enabling ECC memory can reduce the available VRAM for applications by up to 1GB.
  • VRAM capacity (8GB) and 128-bit bus width may be a bottleneck for extremely complex 3D scenes or high-resolution texture work.
  • Massive performance variations between laptops due to widely different TGP (Total Graphics Power) configurations ranging from 35W to 140W.
  • Not optimized for pure gaming; consumer cards like the RTX 4070 often provide better frame-per-dollar value for non-professional users.

Verdict

The NVIDIA RTX 3000 Ada Generation Laptop is a high-end professional GPU built on the 5nm Ada Lovelace architecture, featuring 4,608 CUDA cores, 144 fourth-generation Tensor cores, and 36 third-generation RT cores. It is equipped with 8GB of GDDR6 ECC VRAM on a 128-bit bus, delivering a memory bandwidth of 256 GB/s and a maximum power draw of 115W. Main pros include its support for DLSS 3 frame generation, AV1 hardware encoding, and ECC memory which ensures data integrity for professional CAD and AI workloads. However, potential cons include a narrower 128-bit memory bus that may limit performance at higher resolutions compared to flagship models and the fact that its DisplayPort 1.4a outputs can act as a bottleneck for high-refresh 8K displays.

Compare NVIDIA RTX 3000 Ada Generation Laptop 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 RTX 3000 Ada Generation Laptop and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found