GeForce FX 5700 vs GTX 980M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 980M with GeForce FX 5700, including specs and performance data.

GTX 980M
2014
8 GB GDDR5
19.09
+18990%

GTX 980M outperforms FX 5700 by a whopping 18990% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking2901448
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency13.080.27
ArchitectureMaxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)Rankine (2003−2005)
GPU code nameGM204NV36
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date7 October 2014 (10 years ago)23 October 2003 (21 year 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 cores1536no data
Core clock speed1038 MHz425 MHz
Boost clock speed1127 MHzno data
Number of transistors5,200 million82 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm130 nm
Power consumption (TDP)unknown25 Watt
Texture fill rate51.841.700
Floating-point processing power1.659 TFLOPSno data
ROPs644
TMUs964

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
Bus supportPCI Express 3.0no data
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)AGP 8x
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone
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 typeGDDR5DDR
Maximum RAM amount8 GB128 MB
Memory bus width256 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed2500 MHz250 MHz
Memory bandwidth160 GB/s16 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 outputs1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video
VGA аnalog display support+no data
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support+no data
HDMI+-
G-SYNC support+-

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+-
Ansel+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)9.0a
Shader Model6.4no data
OpenGL4.51.5 (2.1)
OpenCL1.1N/A
Vulkan1.1.126N/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.

GTX 980M 19.09
+18990%
FX 5700 0.10

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.

GTX 980M 7354
+18285%
FX 5700 40

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:

900p1730−1
Full HD70-0−1
1440p36-0−1
4K27-0−1

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 30−33 0−1

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 51 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−35 0−1
Battlefield 5 67 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35−40 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 30−33 0−1
Far Cry 5 62 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 59 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 196
+19500%
1−2
−19500%
Hitman 3 35−40 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 90−95 0−1
Metro Exodus 65 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 50−55 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 100 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 85−90 0−1

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 68 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−35 0−1
Battlefield 5 57 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35−40 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 30−33 0−1
Far Cry 5 52 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 47 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 191
+19000%
1−2
−19000%
Hitman 3 35−40 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 90−95 0−1
Metro Exodus 55 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 50−55 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 60−65 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 121 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 85−90 0−1

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 26 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−35 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35−40 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 30−33 0−1
Far Cry 5 38 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 47 0−1
Hitman 3 35−40 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 90−95 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 60−65 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 33 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 85−90 0−1

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 50−55 0−1

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 33 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 32 0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 20 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12 0−1
Far Cry 5 24 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 134 0−1
Hitman 3 21−24 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40 0−1
Metro Exodus 38 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 35−40 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 110−120 0−1

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 30−35 0−1

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 16 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 17 0−1
Hitman 3 14−16 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 95−100 0−1
Metro Exodus 18 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 22 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 9−10 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5 0−1
Far Cry 5 12 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 26 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 21−24 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 8−9 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18 0−1

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 19.09 0.10
Recency 7 October 2014 23 October 2003
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 128 MB
Chip lithography 28 nm 130 nm

GTX 980M has a 18990% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, a 6300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 364.3% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce GTX 980M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce FX 5700 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 980M is a notebook card while GeForce FX 5700 is a desktop 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 980M
GeForce GTX 980M
NVIDIA GeForce FX 5700
GeForce FX 5700

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.


4.2 336 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.7 71 vote

Rate GeForce FX 5700 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.