Quadro NVS 110M vs GeForce GTX 980 SLI Mobile
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce GTX 980 SLI Mobile with Quadro NVS 110M, including specs and performance data.
GTX 980 SLI Mobile outperforms NVS 110M by a whopping 31583% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 118 | 1447 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 8.23 | 0.86 |
| Architecture | Maxwell (2014−2017) | Curie (2003−2013) |
| GPU code name | N16E-GXX SLI | G72 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Mobile workstation |
| Release date | 22 September 2015 (9 years ago) | 1 June 2006 (18 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 | 7 |
| Core clock speed | 1126 MHz | 300 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1228 MHz | 300 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 10400 Million | 112 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 90 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 330 Watt | 10 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 1.200 |
| ROPs | no data | 2 |
| TMUs | no data | 4 |
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 |
| Interface | no data | PCIe 1.0 x16 |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | None |
| 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 | DDR |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2x 8 GB | 512 MB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 3500 MHz | 300 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 4.8 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 Connectors | no data | No outputs |
| G-SYNC support | + | - |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12_1 | 9.0c (9_3) |
| Shader Model | no data | 3.0 |
| OpenGL | no data | 2.1 |
| OpenCL | no data | N/A |
| 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 | -0−1 |
| 4K | 69 | -0−1 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 80−85
+645%
|
10−12
−645%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 80−85
+4100%
|
2−3
−4100%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 100−110 | 0−1 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 80−85
+645%
|
10−12
−645%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 80−85
+4100%
|
2−3
−4100%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 190−200
+3720%
|
5−6
−3720%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 100−110 | 0−1 |
| Metro Exodus | 90−95 | 0−1 |
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 75−80
+1825%
|
4−5
−1825%
|
| Valorant | 150−160 | 0−1 |
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 100−110 | 0−1 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 80−85
+645%
|
10−12
−645%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 80−85
+4100%
|
2−3
−4100%
|
| Dota 2 | 120−130 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 95−100
+1300%
|
7−8
−1300%
|
| Fortnite | 170−180 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 190−200
+3720%
|
5−6
−3720%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 100−110 | 0−1 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 120−130 | 0−1 |
| Metro Exodus | 90−95 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 200−210
+3920%
|
5−6
−3920%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 75−80
+1825%
|
4−5
−1825%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 141
+3425%
|
4−5
−3425%
|
| Valorant | 150−160 | 0−1 |
| World of Tanks | 270−280
+2690%
|
10−11
−2690%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 100−110 | 0−1 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 80−85
+645%
|
10−12
−645%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 80−85
+4100%
|
2−3
−4100%
|
| Dota 2 | 120−130 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 95−100
+1300%
|
7−8
−1300%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 190−200
+3720%
|
5−6
−3720%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 100−110 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 200−210
+3920%
|
5−6
−3920%
|
| Valorant | 150−160 | 0−1 |
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 30−35
+933%
|
3−4
−933%
|
| Dota 2 | 70−75 | 0−1 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 70−75 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 170−180
+17400%
|
1−2
−17400%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 35−40 | 0−1 |
| World of Tanks | 250−260 | 0−1 |
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 70−75 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 40−45
+1233%
|
3−4
−1233%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 120−130
+3075%
|
4−5
−3075%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 110−120 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 5 | 65−70 | 0−1 |
| Metro Exodus | 85−90 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 65−70
+1625%
|
4−5
−1625%
|
| Valorant | 120−130
+3000%
|
4−5
−3000%
|
4K
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 18−20 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 75−80
+420%
|
14−16
−420%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 75−80
+420%
|
14−16
−420%
|
| Metro Exodus | 30−35 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 120−130 | 0−1 |
| 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 | 18−20 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 16−18
+750%
|
2−3
−750%
|
| Dota 2 | 75−80
+420%
|
14−16
−420%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 55−60 | 0−1 |
| Fortnite | 55−60 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 65−70 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 5 | 35−40 | 0−1 |
| Valorant | 65−70 | 0−1 |
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the GTX 980 SLI Mobile is 17400% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Without exception, GTX 980 SLI Mobile surpassed NVS 110M in all 30 of our tests.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 38.02 | 0.12 |
| Recency | 22 September 2015 | 1 June 2006 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 90 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 330 Watt | 10 Watt |
GTX 980 SLI Mobile has a 31583.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, and a 221.4% more advanced lithography process.
NVS 110M, on the other hand, has 3200% lower power consumption.
The GeForce GTX 980 SLI Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro NVS 110M in performance tests.
Be aware that GeForce GTX 980 SLI Mobile is a notebook graphics card while Quadro NVS 110M 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.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
