NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M vs AMD Radeon R9 270X
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M and AMD Radeon R9 270X videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Technologies. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Differences
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M
- Videocard is newer: launch date 0 year(s) 11 month(s) later
- Around 7% higher boost clock speed: 1127 MHz vs 1050 MHz
- Around 20% higher pipelines: 1536 vs 1280
- Around 80% lower typical power consumption: 100 Watt vs 180 Watt
- 4x more maximum memory size: 8 GB vs 2 GB
- Around 50% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 7352 vs 4892
- Around 46% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 92.634 vs 63.455
- Around 7% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 6.776 vs 6.339
- Around 31% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 10572 vs 8068
- Around 31% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 10572 vs 8068
- Around 66% better performance in 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 2942 vs 1771
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 7 October 2014 vs 8 October 2013 |
| Boost clock speed | 1127 MHz vs 1050 MHz |
| Pipelines | 1536 vs 1280 |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 100 Watt vs 180 Watt |
| Maximum memory size | 8 GB vs 2 GB |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 7352 vs 4892 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 92.634 vs 63.455 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 6.776 vs 6.339 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 10572 vs 8068 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 10572 vs 8068 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 2942 vs 1771 |
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R9 270X
- Around 62% higher texture fill rate: 84 GTexel / s vs 51.84 GTexel / s
- Around 62% better floating-point performance: 2,688 gflops vs 1,659 gflops
- Around 23% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 612 vs 499
- Around 15% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1314.545 vs 1146.534
- 4.6x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 85.21 vs 18.431
- Around 2% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 315.366 vs 308.42
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Texture fill rate | 84 GTexel / s vs 51.84 GTexel / s |
| Floating-point performance | 2,688 gflops vs 1,659 gflops |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 612 vs 499 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1314.545 vs 1146.534 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 85.21 vs 18.431 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 315.366 vs 308.42 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3706 vs 3695 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3350 vs 3342 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3706 vs 3695 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3350 vs 3342 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R9 270X
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score |
|
|
| Name | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M | AMD Radeon R9 270X |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 7352 | 4892 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 499 | 612 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 21586 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 92.634 | 63.455 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1146.534 | 1314.545 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 6.776 | 6.339 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 18.431 | 85.21 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 308.42 | 315.366 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 10572 | 8068 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3695 | 3706 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3342 | 3350 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 10572 | 8068 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3695 | 3706 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3342 | 3350 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 2942 | 1771 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M | AMD Radeon R9 270X | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | GCN 1.0 |
| Code name | GM204 | Curacao |
| Launch date | 7 October 2014 | 8 October 2013 |
| Place in performance rating | 449 | 439 |
| Type | Laptop | Desktop |
| Design | AMD Radeon R9 200 Series | |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $199 | |
| Price now | $399 | |
| Value for money (0-100) | 16.05 | |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1127 MHz | 1050 MHz |
| Core clock speed | 1038 MHz | |
| CUDA cores | 1536 | |
| Floating-point performance | 1,659 gflops | 2,688 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 1536 | 1280 |
| Texture fill rate | 51.84 GTexel / s | 84 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 100 Watt | 180 Watt |
| Transistor count | 5,200 million | 2,800 million |
| Stream Processors | 1280 | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | No outputs | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort |
| DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support | 1 | |
| G-SYNC support | ||
| HDMI | ||
| VGA аnalog display support | 1 | |
| DisplayPort support | ||
| Dual-link DVI support | ||
| Eyefinity | ||
| VGA | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Bus support | PCI Express 3.0 | PCIe 3.0 |
| Interface | MXM-B (3.0) | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Laptop size | large | |
| SLI options | 1 | |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | 2 x 6-pin |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 12 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
| Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory bandwidth | 160 GB / s | 179.2 GB/s |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 2500 MHz | |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Shared memory | 0 | 0 |
Technologies |
||
| Ansel | ||
| BatteryBoost | ||
| CUDA | ||
| DSR | ||
| GameStream | ||
| GameWorks | ||
| GeForce Experience | ||
| GeForce ShadowPlay | ||
| GPU Boost | ||
| H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder | ||
| Optimus | ||
| SLI | ||
| AMD Eyefinity | ||
| AppAcceleration | ||
| CrossFire | ||
| DDMA audio | ||
| FreeSync | ||
| HD3D | ||
| LiquidVR | ||
| TressFX | ||
| TrueAudio | ||
| Unified Video Decoder (UVD) | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M with others
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 980M vs
ATIFireGL V3400
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 980M vs
ATIFirePro 2460 Multi-View
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 980M vs
NVIDIAQuadro M5000M
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 980M vs
NVIDIAQuadro P2000 Max-Q
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 980M vs
AMDRadeon RX Vega 6
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 980M vs
NVIDIAGeForce MX550
