GeForce GT 650M SLI vs GTX 480
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce GTX 480 with GeForce GT 650M SLI, including specs and performance data.
GTX 480 outperforms 650M SLI by a whopping 110% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 505 | 708 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 1.45 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 3.03 | no data |
| Architecture | Fermi (2010−2014) | Kepler (2012−2018) |
| GPU code name | GF100 | N13E-GE |
| Market segment | Desktop | Laptop |
| Release date | 26 March 2010 (16 years ago) | 22 March 2012 (14 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $499 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
Performance to price scatter graph
Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.
Detailed specifications
General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 480 | 768 |
| Core clock speed | 700 MHz | 790 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 835 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 3,100 million | no data |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 250 Watt | no data |
| Maximum GPU temperature | 105 °C | no data |
| Texture fill rate | 42.06 | no data |
| Floating-point processing power | 1.345 TFLOPS | no data |
| ROPs | 48 | no data |
| TMUs | 60 | no data |
| L1 Cache | 960 KB | no data |
| L2 Cache | 768 KB | no 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 size | no data | medium sized |
| Bus support | 16x PCI-E 2.0 | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | no data |
| Length | 267 mm | no data |
| Height | 4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm) | no data |
| Width | 2-slot | no data |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin | no data |
| 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 type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1536 MB | 2x2 GB |
| Memory bus width | 384 Bit | 2x 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1848 MHz (3696 data rate) | 4000 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 177.4 GB/s | no data |
| Shared memory | - | - |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
| Display Connectors | Two Dual Link DVI, Mini HDMI | no data |
| Multi monitor support | + | no data |
| HDMI | + | - |
| HDCP | + | - |
| Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | no data |
| Audio input for HDMI | Internal | no data |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| Optimus | - | + |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 11 |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | no data |
| OpenGL | 4.2 | no data |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | no data |
| Vulkan | N/A | - |
| CUDA | + | + |
Synthetic benchmarks
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.
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.
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:
| 900p | 160−170
+103%
| 79
−103%
|
| Full HD | 100−110
+100%
| 50
−100%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | 4.99 | no data |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Atomic Heart | 24−27
+118%
|
10−12
−118%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 50−55
+152%
|
21−24
−152%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 20−22
+122%
|
9−10
−122%
|
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 18−20
+171%
|
7−8
−171%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Atomic Heart | 24−27
+118%
|
10−12
−118%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 40−45
+132%
|
18−20
−132%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 50−55
+152%
|
21−24
−152%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 20−22
+122%
|
9−10
−122%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 30−35
+129%
|
14−16
−129%
|
| Fortnite | 55−60
+111%
|
27−30
−111%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 40−45
+95.5%
|
21−24
−95.5%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 35−40
+94.4%
|
18−20
−94.4%
|
| Valorant | 90−95
+55.9%
|
55−60
−55.9%
|
Full HD
High
| Atomic Heart | 24−27
+118%
|
10−12
−118%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 40−45
+132%
|
18−20
−132%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 50−55
+152%
|
21−24
−152%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 140−150
+6.5%
|
139
−6.5%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 20−22
+122%
|
9−10
−122%
|
| Dota 2 | 70−75
+77.5%
|
40−45
−77.5%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 30−35
+129%
|
14−16
−129%
|
| Fortnite | 55−60
+111%
|
27−30
−111%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 40−45
+95.5%
|
21−24
−95.5%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 35−40
+147%
|
14−16
−147%
|
| Metro Exodus | 20−22
+122%
|
9−10
−122%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 35−40
+94.4%
|
18−20
−94.4%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 24−27
+92.3%
|
12−14
−92.3%
|
| Valorant | 90−95
+55.9%
|
55−60
−55.9%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 40−45
+132%
|
18−20
−132%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 20−22
+122%
|
9−10
−122%
|
| Dota 2 | 70−75
+77.5%
|
40−45
−77.5%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 30−35
+129%
|
14−16
−129%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 40−45
+95.5%
|
21−24
−95.5%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 35−40
+94.4%
|
18−20
−94.4%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 24−27
+92.3%
|
12−14
−92.3%
|
| Valorant | 90−95
+55.9%
|
55−60
−55.9%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 55−60
+111%
|
27−30
−111%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 18−20
+100%
|
9−10
−100%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 75−80
+108%
|
35−40
−108%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 12−14
+333%
|
3−4
−333%
|
| Metro Exodus | 10−12
+267%
|
3−4
−267%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 50−55
+45.7%
|
35−40
−45.7%
|
| Valorant | 95−100
+106%
|
45−50
−106%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 24−27
+733%
|
3−4
−733%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 8−9
+167%
|
3−4
−167%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 21−24
+163%
|
8−9
−163%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 24−27
+118%
|
10−12
−118%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 12−14
+117%
|
6−7
−117%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 21−24
+133%
|
9−10
−133%
|
4K
High
| Atomic Heart | 8−9
+167%
|
3−4
−167%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 4−5
+300%
|
1−2
−300%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 20−22
+25%
|
16−18
−25%
|
| Metro Exodus | 5−6
+150%
|
2−3
−150%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 10−12
+1000%
|
1−2
−1000%
|
| Valorant | 40−45
+120%
|
20−22
−120%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 12−14
+1100%
|
1−2
−1100%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 4−5
+300%
|
1−2
−300%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
| Dota 2 | 35−40
+125%
|
16−18
−125%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 10−11
+233%
|
3−4
−233%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 16−18
+183%
|
6−7
−183%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
+80%
|
5−6
−80%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 9−10
+80%
|
5−6
−80%
|
This is how GTX 480 and GT 650M SLI compete in popular games:
- GTX 480 is 103% faster in 900p
- GTX 480 is 100% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Battlefield 5, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GTX 480 is 1100% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Without exception, GTX 480 surpassed GT 650M SLI in all 59 of our tests.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 9.79 | 4.66 |
| Recency | 26 March 2010 | 22 March 2012 |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 28 nm |
GTX 480 has a 110% higher aggregate performance score.
GT 650M SLI, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, and a 43% more advanced lithography process.
The GeForce GTX 480 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 650M SLI in performance tests.
Be aware that GeForce GTX 480 is a desktop graphics card while GeForce GT 650M SLI is a notebook one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
