Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile vs Quadro4 980 XGL

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro4 980 XGL with Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile, including specs and performance data.

Quadro4 980 XGL
2002
128 MB DDR
0.01

RTX 3000 Mobile outperforms Quadro4 980 XGL by a whopping 263000% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1507212
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data22.69
ArchitectureKelvin (2001−2003)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameNV28 A2TU106
Market segmentWorkstationMobile workstation
Release date12 November 2002 (22 years ago)27 May 2019 (5 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 coresno data2304
Core clock speed300 MHz945 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1380 MHz
Number of transistors36 million10,800 million
Manufacturing process technology150 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data80 Watt
Texture fill rate2.400198.7
Floating-point processing powerno data6.359 TFLOPS
ROPs864
TMUs8144
Tensor Coresno data288
Ray Tracing Coresno data36

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 sizeno datalarge
InterfaceAGP 8xPCIe 3.0 x16
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data

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 typeDDRGDDR6
Maximum RAM amount128 MB6 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed325 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth10.4 GB/s448.0 GB/s
Shared memoryno 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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x S-VideoNo outputs
G-SYNC support-+

Supported technologies

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

VR Readyno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX8.112 Ultimate (12_1)
Shader Modelno data6.5
OpenGL1.34.6
OpenCLN/A1.2
VulkanN/A1.2.131
CUDA-7.5

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.

Quadro4 980 XGL 0.01
RTX 3000 Mobile 26.31
+263000%

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.

Quadro4 980 XGL 5
RTX 3000 Mobile 10116
+202220%

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-0−1103
4K-0−188

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Elden Ring 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Metro Exodus 91
+0%
91
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Valorant 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Dota 2 44
+0%
44
+0%
Elden Ring 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Far Cry 5 86
+0%
86
+0%
Fortnite 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Metro Exodus 43
+0%
43
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 110
+0%
110
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Valorant 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
World of Tanks 260−270
+0%
260−270
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Dota 2 121
+0%
121
+0%
Far Cry 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Valorant 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Elden Ring 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
World of Tanks 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Far Cry 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Metro Exodus 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Valorant 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Dota 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Elden Ring 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Metro Exodus 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Dota 2 88
+0%
88
+0%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Fortnite 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Valorant 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 63 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.01 26.31
Recency 12 November 2002 27 May 2019
Maximum RAM amount 128 MB 6 GB
Chip lithography 150 nm 12 nm

RTX 3000 Mobile has a 263000% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 16 years, a 4700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 1150% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro4 980 XGL in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro4 980 XGL is a workstation card while Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile 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.

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 Quadro4 980 XGL
Quadro4 980 XGL
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile
Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile

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.


2.8 102 votes

Rate Quadro4 980 XGL on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 317 votes

Rate Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile 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.