GeForce GTX 980 vs Quadro RTX 4000 Mobile

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro RTX 4000 Mobile with GeForce GTX 980, including specs and performance data.

RTX 4000 Mobile
2019
8 GB GDDR6, 110 Watt
34.15
+18.5%

RTX 4000 Mobile outperforms GTX 980 by a moderate 18% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking153195
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data10.98
Power efficiency21.2811.97
ArchitectureTuring (2018−2022)Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)
GPU code nameTU104GM204
Market segmentMobile workstationDesktop
Release date27 May 2019 (5 years ago)19 September 2014 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$549

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 cores25602048
Core clock speed1110 MHz1064 MHz
Boost clock speed1560 MHz1216 MHz
Number of transistors13,600 million5,200 million
Manufacturing process technology12 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)110 Watt165 Watt
Texture fill rate249.6155.6
Floating-point processing power7.987 TFLOPS4.981 TFLOPS
ROPs6464
TMUs160128
Tensor Cores320no data
Ray Tracing Cores40no data

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 supportno dataPCI Express 3.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data267 mm
Heightno data4.376" (11.1 cm)
Widthno data2-slot
Recommended system power (PSU)no data500 Watt
Supplementary power connectorsno data2x 6-pin
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 typeGDDR6GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount8 GB4 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1750 MHz7.0 GB/s
Memory bandwidth448.0 GB/s224 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 outputsDual Link DVI-I, HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.2
Multi monitor supportno data4 displays
VGA аnalog display supportno data+
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) supportno data+
HDMI-+
HDCP-+
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536
G-SYNC support++
Audio input for HDMIno dataInternal

Supported technologies

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

GameStream-+
GeForce ShadowPlay-+
GPU Boostno data2.0
GameWorks-+
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder-+
Optimus-+
BatteryBoost-+
VR Ready+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.56.4
OpenGL4.64.5
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.2.1311.1.126
CUDA7.5+

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.

RTX 4000 Mobile 34.15
+18.5%
GTX 980 28.82

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.

RTX 4000 Mobile 25371
+44.1%
GTX 980 17605

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.

RTX 4000 Mobile 56250
+48%
GTX 980 37997

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.

RTX 4000 Mobile 18849
+45.7%
GTX 980 12938

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.

RTX 4000 Mobile 119052
+39.4%
GTX 980 85374

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.

RTX 4000 Mobile 445161
+37.8%
GTX 980 323076

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 HD111
+19.4%
93
−19.4%
1440p63
+21.2%
52
−21.2%
4K48
+26.3%
38
−26.3%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data5.90
1440pno data10.56
4Kno data14.45

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 55−60
+14.6%
45−50
−14.6%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 87
+26.1%
69
−26.1%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 55−60
+14.3%
45−50
−14.3%
Battlefield 5 100−110
+22.1%
86
−22.1%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 65−70
+11.9%
55−60
−11.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 55−60
+14.6%
45−50
−14.6%
Far Cry 5 70−75
−16.7%
84
+16.7%
Far Cry New Dawn 125
+62.3%
77
−62.3%
Forza Horizon 4 170−180
−47.1%
253
+47.1%
Hitman 3 65−70
+15.3%
55−60
−15.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 140−150
+9.3%
120−130
−9.3%
Metro Exodus 100−110
+10.2%
95−100
−10.2%
Red Dead Redemption 2 80−85
+9.6%
70−75
−9.6%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 180
+38.5%
130
−38.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion 110−120
+6.3%
110−120
−6.3%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 65−70
−20.3%
83
+20.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 55−60
+14.3%
45−50
−14.3%
Battlefield 5 100−110
+41.9%
74
−41.9%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 65−70
+11.9%
55−60
−11.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 55−60
+14.6%
45−50
−14.6%
Far Cry 5 70−75
+4.3%
69
−4.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 90
+40.6%
64
−40.6%
Forza Horizon 4 170−180
−33.7%
230
+33.7%
Hitman 3 65−70
+15.3%
55−60
−15.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 140−150
+9.3%
120−130
−9.3%
Metro Exodus 100−110
+10.2%
95−100
−10.2%
Red Dead Redemption 2 80−85
+9.6%
70−75
−9.6%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 110−120
+14%
100−105
−14%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 65−70
−94.1%
132
+94.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion 110−120
+6.3%
110−120
−6.3%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 54
+54.3%
35
−54.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 55−60
+14.3%
45−50
−14.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 65−70
+11.9%
55−60
−11.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 55−60
+14.6%
45−50
−14.6%
Far Cry 5 70−75
+44%
50
−44%
Forza Horizon 4 170−180
+192%
59
−192%
Hitman 3 65−70
+15.3%
55−60
−15.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 121
−6.6%
120−130
+6.6%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 110−120
+14%
100−105
−14%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 75
+63%
46
−63%
Watch Dogs: Legion 110−120
+6.3%
110−120
−6.3%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 80−85
+9.6%
70−75
−9.6%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 60−65
+29.8%
47
−29.8%
Far Cry New Dawn 60
+36.4%
44
−36.4%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 41
+51.9%
27
−51.9%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−35
+17.2%
27−30
−17.2%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35−40
+15.2%
30−35
−15.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+15%
20−22
−15%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+12.1%
33
−12.1%
Forza Horizon 4 180−190
+26.5%
147
−26.5%
Hitman 3 40−45
+14.3%
35−40
−14.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 89
+48.3%
60−65
−48.3%
Metro Exodus 77
+40%
55−60
−40%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 75−80
+15.4%
65−70
−15.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 40−45
+18.9%
35−40
−18.9%
Watch Dogs: Legion 170−180
+8.3%
150−160
−8.3%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 55−60
+12.2%
45−50
−12.2%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 30−35
+45.5%
22
−45.5%
Far Cry New Dawn 33
+37.5%
24
−37.5%
Hitman 3 24−27
+13%
21−24
−13%
Horizon Zero Dawn 150−160
+9.7%
140−150
−9.7%
Metro Exodus 35−40
+14.7%
30−35
−14.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 51
+75.9%
29
−75.9%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 28
+100%
14
−100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 18−20
+18.8%
16−18
−18.8%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 20−22
+17.6%
16−18
−17.6%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+12.5%
8−9
−12.5%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+12.5%
16
−12.5%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+29.4%
34
−29.4%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 40−45
+13.5%
35−40
−13.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion 14−16
+15.4%
12−14
−15.4%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 27−30
+12%
24−27
−12%

This is how RTX 4000 Mobile and GTX 980 compete in popular games:

  • RTX 4000 Mobile is 19% faster in 1080p
  • RTX 4000 Mobile is 21% faster in 1440p
  • RTX 4000 Mobile is 26% faster in 4K

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

  • in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the RTX 4000 Mobile is 192% faster.
  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the GTX 980 is 94% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • RTX 4000 Mobile is ahead in 66 tests (92%)
  • GTX 980 is ahead in 6 tests (8%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 34.15 28.82
Recency 27 May 2019 19 September 2014
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 12 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 110 Watt 165 Watt

RTX 4000 Mobile has a 18.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 133.3% more advanced lithography process, and 50% lower power consumption.

The Quadro RTX 4000 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 980 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro RTX 4000 Mobile is a mobile workstation card while GeForce GTX 980 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 Quadro RTX 4000 Mobile
Quadro RTX 4000 Mobile
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980
GeForce GTX 980

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.


4.1 30 votes

Rate Quadro RTX 4000 Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3 1464 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 980 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.