Quadro P1000 vs GeForce GTX 980M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 980M with Quadro P1000, including specs and performance data.

GTX 980M
2014
8 GB GDDR5
19.09
+64.7%

GTX 980M outperforms P1000 by an impressive 65% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking291415
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data5.79
Power efficiency13.0919.86
ArchitectureMaxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code nameGM204GP107
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date7 October 2014 (10 years ago)7 February 2017 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$375

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 cores1536640
Core clock speed1038 MHz1493 MHz
Boost clock speed1127 MHz1519 MHz
Number of transistors5,200 million3,300 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)unknown40 Watt
Texture fill rate51.8448.61
Floating-point processing power1.659 TFLOPS1.555 TFLOPS
ROPs6416
TMUs9632

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)PCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data145 mm
Widthno dataMXM Module
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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount8 GB4 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed2500 MHz1502 MHz
Memory bandwidth160 GB/s96.13 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 ConnectorsNo outputsPortable Device Dependent
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)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.46.7
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.13.0
Vulkan1.1.1261.3
CUDA+6.1

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
+64.7%
Quadro P1000 11.59

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 7357
+64.7%
Quadro P1000 4466

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 980M 12517
+109%
Quadro P1000 6001

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 980M 31944
+31.8%
Quadro P1000 24240

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 980M 9682
+102%
Quadro P1000 4787

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 980M 65241
+112%
Quadro P1000 30721

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

GTX 980M 23749
+65.1%
Quadro P1000 14383

3DMark Time Spy Graphics

GTX 980M 2805
+101%
Quadro P1000 1395

GeekBench 5 Vulkan

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses Vulkan API by AMD & Khronos Group.

GTX 980M 14455
+8.7%
Quadro P1000 13300

GeekBench 5 CUDA

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses CUDA API by NVIDIA.

GTX 980M 21471
+50.3%
Quadro P1000 14286

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 maya-04

GTX 980M 84
+97.9%
Quadro P1000 42

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 sw-03

GTX 980M 42
Quadro P1000 87
+108%

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 snx-02

GTX 980M 5
Quadro P1000 56
+1085%

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 catia-04

GTX 980M 39
Quadro P1000 54
+39.9%

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 creo-01

GTX 980M 27
Quadro P1000 57
+111%

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 mediacal-01

GTX 980M 23
+55%
Quadro P1000 15

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 showcase-01

GTX 980M 47
+71.2%
Quadro P1000 27

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 energy-01

GTX 980M 6
+53.8%
Quadro P1000 4

SPECviewperf 12 - Showcase

GTX 980M 47
+71.2%
Quadro P1000 27

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 980M 84
+97.9%
Quadro P1000 42

SPECviewperf 12 - Catia

GTX 980M 39
Quadro P1000 54
+39.9%

SPECviewperf 12 - Solidworks

GTX 980M 42
Quadro P1000 87
+108%

SPECviewperf 12 - Siemens NX

GTX 980M 5
Quadro P1000 56
+1085%

SPECviewperf 12 - Creo

GTX 980M 27
Quadro P1000 57
+111%

SPECviewperf 12 - Medical

GTX 980M 23
+55%
Quadro P1000 15

SPECviewperf 12 - Energy

GTX 980M 6
+53.8%
Quadro P1000 3.9

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:

900p173
+73%
100−110
−73%
Full HD70
+59.1%
44
−59.1%
1440p36
+71.4%
21−24
−71.4%
4K27
+68.8%
16−18
−68.8%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data8.52
1440pno data17.86
4Kno data23.44

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 30−33
+66.7%
18−20
−66.7%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 51
+88.9%
27−30
−88.9%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−35
+77.8%
18−20
−77.8%
Battlefield 5 67
+81.1%
35−40
−81.1%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35−40
+65.2%
21−24
−65.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−33
+66.7%
18−20
−66.7%
Far Cry 5 62
+130%
27−30
−130%
Far Cry New Dawn 59
+84.4%
30−35
−84.4%
Forza Horizon 4 196
+81.5%
108
−81.5%
Hitman 3 35−40
+68.2%
21−24
−68.2%
Horizon Zero Dawn 90−95
+48.4%
60−65
−48.4%
Metro Exodus 65
+71.1%
35−40
−71.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2 50−55
+59.4%
30−35
−59.4%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 100
+88.7%
53
−88.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion 85−90
+30.9%
65−70
−30.9%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 68
+152%
27−30
−152%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−35
+77.8%
18−20
−77.8%
Battlefield 5 57
+54.1%
35−40
−54.1%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35−40
+65.2%
21−24
−65.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−33
+66.7%
18−20
−66.7%
Far Cry 5 52
+92.6%
27−30
−92.6%
Far Cry New Dawn 47
+46.9%
30−35
−46.9%
Forza Horizon 4 191
+91%
100
−91%
Hitman 3 35−40
+68.2%
21−24
−68.2%
Horizon Zero Dawn 90−95
+48.4%
60−65
−48.4%
Metro Exodus 55
+44.7%
35−40
−44.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2 50−55
+59.4%
30−35
−59.4%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 60−65
+70.3%
35−40
−70.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 121
+317%
27−30
−317%
Watch Dogs: Legion 85−90
+30.9%
65−70
−30.9%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 26
−3.8%
27−30
+3.8%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−35
+77.8%
18−20
−77.8%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35−40
+65.2%
21−24
−65.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−33
+66.7%
18−20
−66.7%
Far Cry 5 38
+40.7%
27−30
−40.7%
Forza Horizon 4 47
−61.7%
75−80
+61.7%
Hitman 3 35−40
+68.2%
21−24
−68.2%
Horizon Zero Dawn 90−95
+48.4%
60−65
−48.4%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 60−65
+70.3%
35−40
−70.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 33
+106%
16
−106%
Watch Dogs: Legion 85−90
+30.9%
65−70
−30.9%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 50−55
+59.4%
30−35
−59.4%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 33
+50%
21−24
−50%
Far Cry New Dawn 32
+77.8%
18−20
−77.8%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 20
+81.8%
10−12
−81.8%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18
+113%
8−9
−113%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
+75%
12−14
−75%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+83.3%
6−7
−83.3%
Far Cry 5 24
+84.6%
12−14
−84.6%
Forza Horizon 4 134
+144%
55−60
−144%
Hitman 3 21−24
+57.1%
14−16
−57.1%
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40
+62.5%
24−27
−62.5%
Metro Exodus 38
+111%
18−20
−111%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 35−40
+124%
16−18
−124%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+100%
10−12
−100%
Watch Dogs: Legion 110−120
+56.9%
70−75
−56.9%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 30−35
+63.2%
18−20
−63.2%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 16
+45.5%
10−12
−45.5%
Far Cry New Dawn 17
+113%
8−9
−113%
Hitman 3 14−16
+100%
7−8
−100%
Horizon Zero Dawn 95−100
+84.9%
50−55
−84.9%
Metro Exodus 18
+80%
10−11
−80%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 22
+144%
9−10
−144%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12
+71.4%
7−8
−71.4%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 9−10
+80%
5−6
−80%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
+100%
5−6
−100%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Far Cry 5 12
+100%
6−7
−100%
Forza Horizon 4 26
+73.3%
14−16
−73.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 21−24
+133%
9−10
−133%
Watch Dogs: Legion 8−9
+100%
4−5
−100%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
+54.5%
10−12
−54.5%

This is how GTX 980M and Quadro P1000 compete in popular games:

  • GTX 980M is 73% faster in 900p
  • GTX 980M is 59% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 980M is 71% faster in 1440p
  • GTX 980M is 69% faster in 4K

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

  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the GTX 980M is 317% faster.
  • in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Quadro P1000 is 62% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GTX 980M is ahead in 70 tests (97%)
  • Quadro P1000 is ahead in 2 tests (3%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 19.09 11.59
Recency 7 October 2014 7 February 2017
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm

GTX 980M has a 64.7% higher aggregate performance score, and a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

Quadro P1000, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce GTX 980M is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro P1000 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 980M is a notebook card while Quadro P1000 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 980M
GeForce GTX 980M
NVIDIA Quadro P1000
Quadro P1000

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
3.5 573 votes

Rate Quadro P1000 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.