GeForce 305M vs GTX 980 SLI Mobile
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce GTX 980 SLI Mobile and GeForce 305M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
GTX 980 SLI Mobile outperforms 305M by a whopping 9997% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 115 | 1262 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 8.21 | 1.92 |
| Architecture | Maxwell (2014−2017) | Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013) |
| GPU code name | N16E-GXX SLI | GT218 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 22 September 2015 (9 years ago) | 10 January 2010 (15 years ago) |
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 cores | 4096 | 16 |
| Core clock speed | 1126 MHz | 525 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1228 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | 10400 Million | 260 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 330 Watt | 14 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 4.200 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 0.0368 TFLOPS |
| Gigaflops | no data | 55 |
| ROPs | no data | 4 |
| TMUs | no data | 8 |
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 size | large | no data |
| Bus support | no data | PCI-E 2.0 |
| Interface | no data | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| 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 type | GDDR5 | GDDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2x 8 GB | Up to 512 MB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 3500 MHz | Up to 700 (DDR3), Up to 700 (GDDR3) MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 11.2 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 Connectors | no data | DisplayPortHDMIVGADual Link DVISingle Link DVI |
| Multi monitor support | no data | + |
| HDMI | - | + |
| Maximum VGA resolution | no data | 2048x1536 |
| G-SYNC support | + | - |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| Power management | no data | 8.0 |
API compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12_1 | 11.1 (10_1) |
| Shader Model | no data | 4.1 |
| OpenGL | no data | 2.1 |
| OpenCL | no data | 1.1 |
| Vulkan | - | N/A |
| CUDA | + | + |
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:
| Full HD | 130
+12900%
| 1−2
−12900%
|
| 4K | 69 | 0−1 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 80−85
+925%
|
8−9
−925%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 80−85
+4100%
|
2−3
−4100%
|
| Elden Ring | 130−140
+13700%
|
1−2
−13700%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 100−110
+10300%
|
1−2
−10300%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 80−85
+925%
|
8−9
−925%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 80−85
+4100%
|
2−3
−4100%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 190−200
+3083%
|
6−7
−3083%
|
| Metro Exodus | 90−95 | 0−1 |
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 75−80
+1825%
|
4−5
−1825%
|
| Valorant | 150−160
+15700%
|
1−2
−15700%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 100−110
+10300%
|
1−2
−10300%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 80−85
+925%
|
8−9
−925%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 80−85
+4100%
|
2−3
−4100%
|
| Dota 2 | 120−130
+12200%
|
1−2
−12200%
|
| Elden Ring | 130−140
+13700%
|
1−2
−13700%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 95−100
+1286%
|
7−8
−1286%
|
| Fortnite | 170−180
+17100%
|
1−2
−17100%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 190−200
+3083%
|
6−7
−3083%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 120−130
+12100%
|
1−2
−12100%
|
| Metro Exodus | 90−95 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 200−210
+2771%
|
7−8
−2771%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 75−80
+1825%
|
4−5
−1825%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 141
+2720%
|
5−6
−2720%
|
| Valorant | 150−160
+15700%
|
1−2
−15700%
|
| World of Tanks | 270−280
+1893%
|
14−16
−1893%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 100−110
+10300%
|
1−2
−10300%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 80−85
+925%
|
8−9
−925%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 80−85
+4100%
|
2−3
−4100%
|
| Dota 2 | 120−130
+12200%
|
1−2
−12200%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 95−100
+1286%
|
7−8
−1286%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 190−200
+3083%
|
6−7
−3083%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 200−210
+2771%
|
7−8
−2771%
|
| Valorant | 150−160
+15700%
|
1−2
−15700%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Dota 2 | 70−75 | 0−1 |
| Elden Ring | 80−85 | 0−1 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 70−75 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 170−180
+8650%
|
2−3
−8650%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 35−40 | 0−1 |
| World of Tanks | 240−250
+12350%
|
2−3
−12350%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 70−75 | 0−1 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 40−45
+344%
|
9−10
−344%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 40−45
+1900%
|
2−3
−1900%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 120−130
+3075%
|
4−5
−3075%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 110−120
+11300%
|
1−2
−11300%
|
| Metro Exodus | 85−90 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 65−70
+3300%
|
2−3
−3300%
|
| Valorant | 120−130
+2380%
|
5−6
−2380%
|
4K
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 40−45 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 75−80
+413%
|
14−16
−413%
|
| Elden Ring | 35−40 | 0−1 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 75−80
+420%
|
14−16
−420%
|
| Metro Exodus | 30−35 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 120−130
+12700%
|
1−2
−12700%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 24−27 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 75−80
+420%
|
14−16
−420%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 45−50 | 0−1 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 40−45 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 16−18
+1600%
|
1−2
−1600%
|
| Dota 2 | 75−80
+413%
|
14−16
−413%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 55−60 | 0−1 |
| Fortnite | 55−60 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 65−70 | 0−1 |
| Valorant | 65−70
+6400%
|
1−2
−6400%
|
This is how GTX 980 SLI Mobile and GeForce 305M compete in popular games:
- GTX 980 SLI Mobile is 12900% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the GTX 980 SLI Mobile is 12700% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Without exception, GTX 980 SLI Mobile surpassed GeForce 305M in all 32 of our tests.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 39.38 | 0.39 |
| Recency | 22 September 2015 | 10 January 2010 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 330 Watt | 14 Watt |
GTX 980 SLI Mobile has a 9997.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.
GeForce 305M, on the other hand, has 2257.1% lower power consumption.
The GeForce GTX 980 SLI Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 305M in performance tests.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
