GeForce GTX 860M vs GTX 980 Mobile

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 980 Mobile and GeForce GTX 860M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTX 980 Mobile
2015
4 GB GDDR5, 100 Watt
21.58
+171%

GTX 980 Mobile outperforms GTX 860M by a whopping 171% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking265530
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation20.10no data
Power efficiency7.397.27
ArchitectureMaxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)Maxwell (2014−2017)
GPU code nameGM204GM107
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date21 September 2015 (9 years ago)13 January 2014 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$395.82 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

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 cores20481152 or 640
Core clock speed1064 MHz797 MHz
Boost clock speed1216 MHz1085 MHz
Number of transistors5,200 million1,870 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)100-200 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rate136.243.40
Floating-point processing power4.358 TFLOPS1.389 TFLOPS
ROPs6416
TMUs12840

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 sizelargemedium sized
Bus supportPCI Express 3.0PCI Express 2.0, PCI Express 3.0
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)MXM-B (3.0)
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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount4 GB4 GB
Standard memory configurationno dataGDDR5
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed7.0 GB/sUp to 2500 MHz
Memory bandwidth224 GB/s80.0 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 ConnectorsDual Link DVI-I, HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.2No outputs
Multi monitor support4 displaysno data
eDP 1.2 signal supportno dataUp to 3840x2160
LVDS signal supportno dataUp to 1920x1200
VGA аnalog display support+Up to 2048x1536
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support+Up to 3840x2160
HDMI++
HDCP+-
HDCP content protection-+
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
G-SYNC support+-
Audio input for HDMIInternalno data
7.1 channel HD audio on HDMI-+
TrueHD and DTS-HD audio bitstreaming-+

Supported technologies

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

GameStream+-
GeForce ShadowPlay+-
GPU Boost2.0no data
GameWorks+-
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder++
Optimus++
BatteryBoost+-
Anselno data+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (11_0)
Shader Model6.45.1
OpenGL4.54.5
OpenCL1.21.1
Vulkan1.1.1261.1.126
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.

GTX 980 Mobile 21.58
+171%
GTX 860M 7.96

  • Other tests
    • 3DMark 11 Performance GPU
    • 3DMark Vantage Performance
    • 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics
    • 3DMark Cloud Gate GPU
    • 3DMark Ice Storm GPU
    • SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 maya-04
    • SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 sw-03
    • SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 snx-02
    • SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 catia-04
    • SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 creo-01
    • SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 mediacal-01
    • SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 showcase-01
    • SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 energy-01
    • SPECviewperf 12 - Showcase
    • SPECviewperf 12 - Maya
    • SPECviewperf 12 - Catia
    • SPECviewperf 12 - Solidworks
    • SPECviewperf 12 - Siemens NX
    • SPECviewperf 12 - Creo
    • SPECviewperf 12 - Medical
    • SPECviewperf 12 - Energy

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

GTX 980 Mobile 17201
+251%
GTX 860M 4902

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

GTX 980 Mobile 39702
+107%
GTX 860M 19216

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

GTX 980 Mobile 13047
+234%
GTX 860M 3904

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

GTX 980 Mobile 76705
+174%
GTX 860M 27961

3DMark Ice Storm GPU

Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.

GTX 980 Mobile 347481
+61.5%
GTX 860M 215144

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 maya-04

GTX 980 Mobile 107
+361%
GTX 860M 23

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 sw-03

GTX 980 Mobile 49
+321%
GTX 860M 12

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 snx-02

GTX 980 Mobile 6
+239%
GTX 860M 2

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 catia-04

GTX 980 Mobile 54
+253%
GTX 860M 15

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 creo-01

GTX 980 Mobile 35
+50%
GTX 860M 23

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 mediacal-01

GTX 980 Mobile 31
+375%
GTX 860M 7

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 showcase-01

GTX 980 Mobile 59
+245%
GTX 860M 17

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 energy-01

GTX 980 Mobile 7
GTX 860M 9
+20.8%

SPECviewperf 12 - Showcase

GTX 980 Mobile 59
+245%
GTX 860M 17

SPECviewperf 12 - Maya

This part of SPECviewperf 12 workstation benchmark uses Autodesk Maya 13 engine to render a superhero energy plant static scene consisting of more than 700 thousand polygons, in six different modes.

GTX 980 Mobile 107
+361%
GTX 860M 23

SPECviewperf 12 - Catia

GTX 980 Mobile 54
+253%
GTX 860M 15

SPECviewperf 12 - Solidworks

GTX 980 Mobile 49
+321%
GTX 860M 12

SPECviewperf 12 - Siemens NX

GTX 980 Mobile 6
+239%
GTX 860M 2

SPECviewperf 12 - Creo

GTX 980 Mobile 35
+50%
GTX 860M 23

SPECviewperf 12 - Medical

GTX 980 Mobile 31
+375%
GTX 860M 7

SPECviewperf 12 - Energy

GTX 980 Mobile 7.2
GTX 860M 8.7
+20.8%

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:

900p240−250
+164%
91
−164%
Full HD99
+168%
37
−168%
4K46
+254%
13
−254%

Cost per frame, $

1080p4.00no data
4K8.60no data

FPS performance in popular games

  • Full HD
    Low Preset
  • Full HD
    Medium Preset
  • Full HD
    High Preset
  • Full HD
    Ultra Preset
  • Full HD
    Epic Preset
  • 1440p
    High Preset
  • 1440p
    Ultra Preset
  • 1440p
    Epic Preset
  • 4K
    High Preset
  • 4K
    Ultra Preset
  • 4K
    Epic Preset
  • 1440p
    High Preset
Atomic Heart 50−55
+200%
18−20
−200%
Counter-Strike 2 35−40
+171%
14−16
−171%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
+187%
14−16
−187%
Atomic Heart 50−55
+200%
18−20
−200%
Battlefield 5 80−85
+159%
30−35
−159%
Counter-Strike 2 35−40
+171%
14−16
−171%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
+187%
14−16
−187%
Far Cry 5 65−70
+183%
24−27
−183%
Fortnite 100−110
+133%
45−50
−133%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
+148%
30−35
−148%
Forza Horizon 5 55−60
+217%
18−20
−217%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 75−80
+185%
27−30
−185%
Valorant 140−150
+89.7%
75−80
−89.7%
Atomic Heart 50−55
+200%
18−20
−200%
Battlefield 5 80−85
+159%
30−35
−159%
Counter-Strike 2 35−40
+171%
14−16
−171%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 230−240
+99.2%
110−120
−99.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
+187%
14−16
−187%
Dota 2 110−120
+96.5%
55−60
−96.5%
Far Cry 5 65−70
+183%
24−27
−183%
Fortnite 100−110
+133%
45−50
−133%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
+148%
30−35
−148%
Forza Horizon 5 55−60
+217%
18−20
−217%
Grand Theft Auto V 84
+223%
26
−223%
Metro Exodus 40−45
+214%
14−16
−214%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 75−80
+185%
27−30
−185%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 84
+320%
20
−320%
Valorant 140−150
+89.7%
75−80
−89.7%
Battlefield 5 80−85
+159%
30−35
−159%
Counter-Strike 2 35−40
+171%
14−16
−171%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
+187%
14−16
−187%
Dota 2 110−120
+96.5%
55−60
−96.5%
Far Cry 5 65−70
+183%
24−27
−183%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
+148%
30−35
−148%
Forza Horizon 5 55−60
+217%
18−20
−217%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 75−80
+185%
27−30
−185%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 44
+267%
12
−267%
Valorant 140−150
+89.7%
75−80
−89.7%
Fortnite 100−110
+133%
45−50
−133%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 140−150
+154%
55−60
−154%
Grand Theft Auto V 35−40
+250%
10−11
−250%
Metro Exodus 24−27
+271%
7−8
−271%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+333%
40−45
−333%
Valorant 180−190
+119%
85−90
−119%
Battlefield 5 55−60
+280%
14−16
−280%
Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+200%
7−8
−200%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+217%
6−7
−217%
Far Cry 5 45−50
+207%
14−16
−207%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+183%
18−20
−183%
Forza Horizon 5 35−40
+177%
12−14
−177%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+175%
12−14
−175%
Fortnite 45−50
+213%
14−16
−213%
Atomic Heart 16−18
+167%
6−7
−167%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+350%
2−3
−350%
Grand Theft Auto V 60
+233%
18−20
−233%
Metro Exodus 16−18
+750%
2−3
−750%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30
+400%
6−7
−400%
Valorant 110−120
+205%
35−40
−205%
Battlefield 5 30−35
+343%
7−8
−343%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+350%
2−3
−350%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%
Dota 2 65−70
+156%
27−30
−156%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+175%
8−9
−175%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+192%
12−14
−192%
Forza Horizon 5 18−20
+260%
5−6
−260%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 20−22
+186%
7−8
−186%
Fortnite 21−24
+200%
7−8
−200%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%

This is how GTX 980 Mobile and GTX 860M compete in popular games:

  • GTX 980 Mobile is 164% faster in 900p
  • GTX 980 Mobile is 168% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 980 Mobile is 254% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Metro Exodus, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the GTX 980 Mobile is 750% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GTX 980 Mobile is ahead in 66 tests (99%)
  • there's a draw in 1 test (1%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 21.58 7.96
Recency 21 September 2015 13 January 2014
Power consumption (TDP) 100 Watt 75 Watt

GTX 980 Mobile has a 171.1% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 1 year.

GTX 860M, on the other hand, has 33.3% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 980 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 860M in performance tests.

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 Mobile
GeForce GTX 980
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 860M
GeForce GTX 860M

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.


3.4
81 vote

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7
458 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 860M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GTX 980 Mobile or GeForce GTX 860M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.