NVS 310 vs GeForce GTX 980 SLI Mobile

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 980 SLI Mobile with NVS 310, including specs and performance data.

GTX 980 SLI Mobile
2015
2x 8 GB GDDR5, 330 Watt
39.22
+5934%

GTX 980 SLI Mobile outperforms NVS 310 by a whopping 5934% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1131186
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.01
Power efficiency8.232.25
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2017)Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)
GPU code nameN16E-GXX SLIGF119
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date22 September 2015 (9 years ago)26 June 2012 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$159

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores409648
Core clock speed1126 MHz523 MHz
Boost clock speed1228 MHzno data
Number of transistors10400 Million292 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)330 Watt20 Watt
Texture fill rateno data4.184
Floating-point processing powerno data0.1004 TFLOPS
ROPsno data4
TMUsno data8

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 sizelargeno data
Interfaceno dataPCIe 2.0 x16
Lengthno data156 mm
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone
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 typeGDDR5DDR3
Maximum RAM amount2x 8 GB512 MB
Memory bus width256 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed3500 MHz875 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data14 GB/s
Shared memory-no data

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 Connectorsno data2x DisplayPort
G-SYNC support+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12_112 (11_0)
Shader Modelno data5.1
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data1.1
Vulkan-N/A
CUDA+2.1

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:

Full HD132
+6500%
2−3
−6500%
4K65
+6400%
1−2
−6400%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data79.50
4Kno data159.00

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 65−70
+6700%
1−2
−6700%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 80−85
+8100%
1−2
−8100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 65−70
+6600%
1−2
−6600%
Battlefield 5 120−130
+6100%
2−3
−6100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 75−80
+7700%
1−2
−7700%
Cyberpunk 2077 65−70
+6700%
1−2
−6700%
Far Cry 5 80−85
+8300%
1−2
−8300%
Far Cry New Dawn 95−100
+9500%
1−2
−9500%
Forza Horizon 4 190−200
+6233%
3−4
−6233%
Hitman 3 80−85
+8100%
1−2
−8100%
Horizon Zero Dawn 160−170
+8000%
2−3
−8000%
Metro Exodus 120−130
+6100%
2−3
−6100%
Red Dead Redemption 2 90−95
+9000%
1−2
−9000%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 140−150
+6950%
2−3
−6950%
Watch Dogs: Legion 120−130
+6300%
2−3
−6300%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 80−85
+8100%
1−2
−8100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 65−70
+6600%
1−2
−6600%
Battlefield 5 120−130
+6100%
2−3
−6100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 75−80
+7700%
1−2
−7700%
Cyberpunk 2077 65−70
+6700%
1−2
−6700%
Far Cry 5 80−85
+8300%
1−2
−8300%
Far Cry New Dawn 95−100
+9500%
1−2
−9500%
Forza Horizon 4 190−200
+6233%
3−4
−6233%
Hitman 3 80−85
+8100%
1−2
−8100%
Horizon Zero Dawn 160−170
+8000%
2−3
−8000%
Metro Exodus 120−130
+6100%
2−3
−6100%
Red Dead Redemption 2 90−95
+9000%
1−2
−9000%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 140−150
+6950%
2−3
−6950%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 137
+6750%
2−3
−6750%
Watch Dogs: Legion 120−130
+6300%
2−3
−6300%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 80−85
+8100%
1−2
−8100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 65−70
+6600%
1−2
−6600%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 75−80
+7700%
1−2
−7700%
Cyberpunk 2077 65−70
+6700%
1−2
−6700%
Far Cry 5 80−85
+8300%
1−2
−8300%
Forza Horizon 4 190−200
+6233%
3−4
−6233%
Hitman 3 80−85
+8100%
1−2
−8100%
Horizon Zero Dawn 160−170
+8000%
2−3
−8000%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 140−150
+6950%
2−3
−6950%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 74
+7300%
1−2
−7300%
Watch Dogs: Legion 120−130
+6300%
2−3
−6300%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 90−95
+9000%
1−2
−9000%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 70−75
+7300%
1−2
−7300%
Far Cry New Dawn 55−60 0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 40−45 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 40−45 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 45−50 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 30−33 0−1
Far Cry 5 45−50 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 210−220
+7133%
3−4
−7133%
Hitman 3 50−55 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 80−85
+8300%
1−2
−8300%
Metro Exodus 70−75
+7100%
1−2
−7100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 90−95
+9200%
1−2
−9200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 55−60 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 190−200
+6233%
3−4
−6233%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 65−70
+6500%
1−2
−6500%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 30−35 0−1
Hitman 3 30−35 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 180−190
+8900%
2−3
−8900%
Metro Exodus 45−50 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 51 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 24−27 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 24−27 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 24−27 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14 0−1
Far Cry 5 21−24 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 50−55 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 50−55 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 18−20 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 30−35 0−1

This is how GTX 980 SLI Mobile and NVS 310 compete in popular games:

  • GTX 980 SLI Mobile is 6500% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 980 SLI Mobile is 6400% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 39.22 0.65
Recency 22 September 2015 26 June 2012
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 330 Watt 20 Watt

GTX 980 SLI Mobile has a 5933.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

NVS 310, on the other hand, has 1550% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 980 SLI Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the NVS 310 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 980 SLI Mobile is a notebook card while NVS 310 is a 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 GTX 980 SLI Mobile
GeForce GTX 980 SLI Mobile
NVIDIA NVS 310
NVS 310

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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 65 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 980 SLI Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 81 vote

Rate NVS 310 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.