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 A3000 Laptop review: 117 specs compared

Avg. price:~£2,060VRAM:6 GBMemory bus width:192 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):60 W

NVIDIA RTX A3000 Laptop Review: Compare 117 technical specifications and 3 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Graphics cards category and whether it is worth buying.

6.8/10

Overall score

Score
6.8/ 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 73% of models
Score components

40%

5.2

Technical score

25%

8.2

Reviews score

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 73% 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%

6.8

Overall score

30%

1.0

Price

â–¼Worse than 99%
5.2

Technical score

Technical score
5.2/ 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 80% of models
Score components

44%

3.9

Performance

24%

4.0

Memory

12%

6.9

Power

11%

9.2

Features

5%

7.6

Design

4%

7.8

Connectivity

â–¼Worse than 80%
8.2

Reviews score

Reviews score
8.2/ 10
✕
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
â–² Better than 69% of models

80%

8.4

Average grade

20%

7.4

Popularity

Grades by review (3)
2 reviews: 2 with a printed score, 0 estimated from the review. 1 video review, counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
â–²Better than 69%
?

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~ £2,060
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 A3000 Laptop

Technical score
Technical score
5.2/ 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 80% of models
Score components:

44%

3.9

Performance

24%

4.0

Memory

12%

6.9

Power

11%

9.2

Features

5%

7.6

Design

4%

7.8

Connectivity

5.2
Reviews score
8.2
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%

6.8

Overall score

30%

1.0

Price

5.1
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
7,324 points
Market range: <4.1k points – >30.1k points
This graphics card scores 7,324 points in 3DMark Time Spy, which is lower than 80.1% of graphics cards.
3DMark Port Royal score
4,542 points
Market range: <0 points – >22.4k points
This graphics card scores 4,542 points in 3DMark Port Royal, which is lower than 73.5% of graphics cards.
PassMark (G3D) result
12,693 points
Market range: <7.7k points – >36k points
This graphics card scores 12,693 points in PassMark G3D, which is lower than 79.4% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
5,527 points
Market range: <3.1k points – >26.3k points
This graphics card scores 5,527 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is lower than 80.7% of graphics cards.
FP32 performance
12.8 TFLOPS
Market range: <3.94 TFLOPS – >56.3 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 12.8 TFLOPS FP32 performance, which is lower than that of 69.4% of graphics cards.
Show more
VRAM
6 GB
Market range: <4 GB – >16 GB
This graphics card has 6 GB of VRAM, which is less than 82.5% of graphics cards and equal to 5.1% 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
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
264 GB/s
Market range: <168 GB/s – >960 GB/s
This graphics card reaches 264 GB/s memory bandwidth, which is lower than that of 79.3% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.1% of graphics cards.
Effective memory speed
14,000 MHz
Market range: <7k MHz – >28k MHz
This graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 14,000 MHz, which is slower than that of 69.4% of graphics cards and equal to that of 11.1% 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
0
Market range: <1 – >3
This graphics card offers 0 DisplayPort outputs, which is fewer than 96.9% of graphics cards and equal to 3.1% 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
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)
60 W
Market range: <86 W – >360 W
This graphics card has a TDP of 60 W, which is lower than that of 95.3% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.4% of graphics cards.
Power consumption while under peak load
115 W
Market range: <106 W – >365 W
This graphics card draws 115 W under peak load, which is lower than 87.4% of graphics cards and equal to 2% of graphics cards.
Recommended PSU wattage
450 W
Market range: <450 W – >850 W
This graphics card recommends a 450 W PSU, which is lower than that of 84% of graphics cards and equal to that of 6.1% of graphics cards.
Board power limit
60 W
Market range: <107 W – >400 W
This graphics card has a board power limit of 60 W, which is lower than that of 96.2% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.3% of graphics cards.
PCIe power spec
87.5 W
Show more
Size
?
Length
?
Height
?
Slot width
?
Weight
?
Show more

NVIDIA RTX A3000 Laptop vs the average graphics card

246810TotalPerformanceMemoryFeaturesConnectivityPowerDesign
  • 72.1% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (60 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    60 W vs 215 W
  • Supports ECC memory
    This graphics card supports ECC memory, the average graphics card does not.
  • 30.8% lower PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a lower PSU requirement than the average graphics card (450 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    450 W vs 650 W
  • 72.7% lower board power limit
    This graphics card has a lower board power limit than the average graphics card (60 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 220 W.
    60 W vs 220 W
  • 13.9% higher review score
    Reviews score
    8.2/ 10
    ✕
    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
    â–² Better than 69% of models

    80%

    8.4

    Average grade

    20%

    7.4

    Popularity

    Grades by review (3)
    2 reviews: 2 with a printed score, 0 estimated from the review. 1 video review, counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    8.2 vs 7.2
  • 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
  • 66.7% lower idle power draw
    This graphics card has a lower idle power draw than the average graphics card (4 W vs 12 W). The average graphics card has an idle power draw of 12 W.
    4 W vs 12 W
  • 47.7% lower peak power draw
    This graphics card has a lower peak power draw than the average graphics card (115 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a peak power draw of 220 W.
    115 W vs 220 W
  • 13.9% higher review score
    Reviews score
    8.2/ 10
    ✕
    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
    â–² Better than 69% of models

    80%

    8.4

    Average grade

    20%

    7.4

    Popularity

    Grades by review (3)
    2 reviews: 2 with a printed score, 0 estimated from the review. 1 video review, counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    8.2 vs 7.2
  • Supports ECC memory
    This graphics card supports ECC memory, the average graphics card does not.
  • 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
  • 72.1% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (60 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    60 W vs 215 W
  • 30.8% lower PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a lower PSU requirement than the average graphics card (450 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    450 W vs 650 W
  • 72.7% lower board power limit
    This graphics card has a lower board power limit than the average graphics card (60 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 220 W.
    60 W vs 220 W
  • 66.7% lower idle power draw
    This graphics card has a lower idle power draw than the average graphics card (4 W vs 12 W). The average graphics card has an idle power draw of 12 W.
    4 W vs 12 W
  • 47.7% lower peak power draw
    This graphics card has a lower peak power draw than the average graphics card (115 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a peak power draw of 220 W.
    115 W vs 220 W
  • 37.7% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,560 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    1,560 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 6 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (6 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    6 GB vs 12 GB
  • 2 fewer fans
    This graphics card has fewer fans than the average graphics card (1 vs 3).
    1 vs 3
  • 68.8% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (600 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    600 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • Less advanced frame generation
    This graphics card has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (no vs multi frame generation).
  • No overclocking support
    This graphics card does not support overclocking, the average graphics card does.
  • 58.4% lower texture rate
    This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (157.4 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    157.4 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • 60% larger process node
    This graphics card uses a larger manufacturing process than the average graphics card (8 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a manufacturing process of 5 nm.
    8 nm vs 5 nm
  • 3.96x more expensive
    NVIDIA RTX A3000 Laptop is more expensive than the average graphics card (£2,060 vs £520).
    £2,060 vs £520
  • 46.7% worse value for money
    NVIDIA RTX A3000 Laptop has worse value for money than the average graphics card (5.05 vs 7.4).
    5.05 vs 7.41
  • 37.7% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,560 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    1,560 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 68.8% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (600 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    600 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • 58.4% lower texture rate
    This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (157.4 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    157.4 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • 51.2% lower pixel rate
    This graphics card has a lower pixel rate than the average graphics card (78.7 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s). The average graphics card has a pixel rate of 161.3 GPixel/s.
    78.72 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s
  • 56 fewer TMUs
    This graphics card has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (128 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    128 vs 184
  • 8 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (32 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    32 vs 40
  • 8 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (32 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    32 vs 40
  • 43.4% lower FP32 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP32 performance than the average graphics card (12.8 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.6 TFLOPS.
    12.8 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS
  • 43.9% lower PassMark score
    This graphics card has a lower PassMark score than the average graphics card (12,693 points vs 22,638 points). The average graphics card has a PassMark score of 22,638 points.
    12,693 points vs 22,638 points
  • 50.4% lower gaming score
    This graphics card has a lower gaming score than the average graphics card (7,324 points vs 14,779 points). The average graphics card has a gaming score of 14,779 points.
    7,324 points vs 14,779 points
  • 2 years older
    This graphics card was released earlier than the average graphics card (2021 vs 2023).
    April 2021
    2021 vs 2023
  • 50.3% lower ray tracing score
    This graphics card has a lower ray tracing score than the average graphics card (4,542 points vs 9,148 points). The average graphics card has a ray tracing score of 9,148 points.
    4,542 points vs 9,148 points
  • 16 fewer AI cores
    This graphics card has fewer AI cores than the average graphics card (128 vs 144). The average graphics card has 144 AI cores.
    128 vs 144
  • 68.8% 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.
    0.15 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS
  • 54.2% lower compute score
    This graphics card has a lower compute score than the average graphics card (5,527 points vs 12,70.5 points). The average graphics card has a compute score of 12,070.5 points.
    5,527 points vs 12,070.5 points
  • 56.6% lower FP16 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP16 performance than the average graphics card (12.8 TFLOPS vs 29.5 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP16 performance of 29.5 TFLOPS.
    12.8 TFLOPS vs 29.5 TFLOPS
  • 6 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (6 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    6 GB vs 12 GB
  • 41.1% lower memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (264 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    264 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • 26.3% slower memory speed
    This graphics card has a lower effective memory speed than the average graphics card (14,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz). The average graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 19,000 MHz.
    14,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz
  • 83.3% smaller L2 cache
    This graphics card has fewer L2 cache than the average graphics card (4 MB vs 24 MB). The average graphics card has 24 MB L2 cache.
    4 MB vs 24 MB
  • Less advanced frame generation
    This graphics card has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (no vs multi frame generation).
  • 60% larger process node
    This graphics card uses a larger manufacturing process than the average graphics card (8 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a manufacturing process of 5 nm.
    8 nm vs 5 nm
  • 33.3% larger GPU die
    This graphics card has a higher GPU die size than the average graphics card (392 mm² vs 294 mm²). The average graphics card has a GPU die size of 294 mm².
    392 mm² vs 294 mm²
  • 3 fewer DisplayPort outputs
    This graphics card has fewer DisplayPort outputs than the average graphics card (0 vs 3). The average graphics card has 3 DisplayPort outputs.
    0 vs 3
  • No AV1 encoding
    This graphics card does not support AV1 encoding, the average graphics card does.
  • 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
  • More basic codec support
    This graphics card encodes more basic formats than the average graphics card (H.264/H.265/AV1 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9).
    H.264/H.265/AV1 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9
  • 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
  • 2 fewer fans
    This graphics card has fewer fans than the average graphics card (1 vs 3).
    1 vs 3
  • No overclocking support
    This graphics card does not support overclocking, the average graphics card does.
  • No dual BIOS
    This graphics card does not include dual BIOS, the average graphics card does.
  • No fan stop
    This graphics card does not support fan stop, the average graphics card does.
  • 14.6 dB noisier under load
    This graphics card has a higher load noise level than the average graphics card (50 dB vs 35.4 dB). The average graphics card has a load noise level of 35.4 dB.
    50 dB vs 35.4 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

9.0
Jeff Heaton
≈ estimated
03/04/2023
Hands-on review · machine learning use and setup
Verdict
NVIDIA RTX A3000 Laptop is a strong machine learning laptop, especially for its OLED screen.
Hands-on video, no verdict

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

8.7
notebookcheck.com
✓ explicit
30/09/2021
Classic laptop review · Mobile workstation
Verdict
The Lenovo ThinkPad P15 G2 is a traditional mobile workstation that puts performance and easy servicing ahead of a slim design, with an RTX A3000 GPU.
9.2
profesionalreview.com
✓ explicit
05/09/2022
Hands-on test · Creator laptop
Verdict
The MSI CreatorPro Z16P is a sturdy creator laptop with nearly 8 hours of light use and a fast 165Hz touch screen, but it is not built for gaming.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about NVIDIA RTX A3000 Laptop

  • Excellent for professional workflows including CAD (SolidWorks), 3D rendering (Blender), and video editing (Adobe Premiere Pro)
  • Significant productivity boost with OptiX acceleration, reducing render times by up to 3x compared to older GPUs
  • Stable performance with ISV-certified drivers ensuring fewer crashes and artifacts in creative applications
  • Features 128 Tensor cores and 32 Ray Tracing cores, supporting advanced AI denoising and realistic lighting
  • ECC (Error-Correcting Code) memory support on certain models helps prevent data corruption during long scientific computations
  • Highly efficient in mobile workstations like the HP ZBook series, often maintaining stable temperatures under sustained load

What customers don't like about NVIDIA RTX A3000 Laptop

  • Drivers are not optimized for gaming, which can lead to lower performance compared to GeForce equivalents in some titles
  • Significantly more expensive than gaming laptops with similar raw hardware specs due to professional certifications and build quality
  • VRAM capacity (standard 6GB) may be a bottleneck for extremely large 8K textures or massive 3D scenes compared to the 12GB version
  • Performance is heavily dependent on the laptop's specific TGP (power limit) and cooling solution, leading to variable results across different laptop models
  • Lacks native display connectivity, relying entirely on the host laptop's output ports

Verdict

The NVIDIA RTX A3000 Laptop GPU is a professional-grade workstation graphics card based on the 8nm Ampere (GA104) architecture, typically featuring 4,096 CUDA cores and either 6GB or 12GB of GDDR6 VRAM on a 192-bit bus. Its main characteristics include dedicated hardware for real-time ray tracing (32 RT cores) and AI-accelerated tasks (128 Tensor cores), with power draw ranging from 60W to 130W depending on the specific laptop configuration. Key pros include certified drivers for high-stability in professional applications like CAD and 3D rendering, performance roughly comparable to a GeForce RTX 3060, and support for advanced features like DLSS. However, cons include higher pricing compared to consumer gaming GPUs, lower gaming performance than its GeForce counterparts due to driver optimization, and potentially limited availability in budget workstations.

Compare NVIDIA RTX A3000 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 A3000 Laptop and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found