Quadro K1000M vs GeForce 9800 GT

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce 9800 GT with Quadro K1000M, including specs and performance data.

9800 GT
2008
1 GB GDDR3, 105 Watt
1.24

K1000M outperforms 9800 GT by an impressive 63% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking1041893
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.070.50
Power efficiency0.683.09
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameG92GK107
Market segmentDesktopMobile workstation
Release date21 July 2008 (16 years ago)1 June 2012 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$160 $119.90

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

K1000M has 614% better value for money than 9800 GT.

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores112192
Core clock speed600 MHz850 MHz
Number of transistors754 million1,270 million
Manufacturing process technology65 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)105 Watt45 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature105 °Cno data
Texture fill rate33.6013.60
Floating-point processing power0.336 TFLOPS0.3264 TFLOPS
ROPs1616
TMUs5616

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Laptop sizeno datamedium sized
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16MXM-A (3.0)
Length229 mmno data
Height1-slotno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pinno data
SLI options+-

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeGDDR3DDR3
Maximum RAM amount1 GB2 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed900 MHz900 MHz
Memory bandwidth57.6 GB/s28.8 GB/s
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display ConnectorsHDTVDual Link DVINo outputs
Multi monitor support+no data
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIS/PDIFno data

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Optimus-+

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 (11_0)
Shader Model4.05.1
OpenGL2.14.6
OpenCL1.11.2
VulkanN/A+
CUDA++

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

9800 GT 1.24
K1000M 2.02
+62.9%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

9800 GT 478
K1000M 775
+62.1%

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

900p5−6
−80%
9
+80%
Full HD9−10
−77.8%
16
+77.8%

Cost per frame, $

1080p17.78
−137%
7.49
+137%
  • K1000M has 137% lower cost per frame in 1080p

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Elden Ring 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Metro Exodus 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Dota 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Elden Ring 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Fortnite 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Metro Exodus 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
World of Tanks 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Dota 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Elden Ring 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
World of Tanks 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 0−1 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Valorant 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Elden Ring 0−1 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Fortnite 0−1 0−1
Valorant 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

This is how 9800 GT and K1000M compete in popular games:

  • K1000M is 80% faster in 900p
  • K1000M is 78% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 49 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.24 2.02
Recency 21 July 2008 1 June 2012
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 2 GB
Chip lithography 65 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 105 Watt 45 Watt

K1000M has a 62.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 132.1% more advanced lithography process, and 133.3% lower power consumption.

The Quadro K1000M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 9800 GT in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce 9800 GT is a desktop card while Quadro K1000M is a mobile workstation one.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce 9800 GT
GeForce 9800 GT
NVIDIA Quadro K1000M
Quadro K1000M

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.3 1459 votes

Rate GeForce 9800 GT on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 88 votes

Rate Quadro K1000M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.