GeForce GTX 980 Ti vs Quadro GP100
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Quadro GP100 with GeForce GTX 980 Ti, including specs and performance data.
GP100 outperforms 980 Ti by a minimal 3% 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 | 173 | 185 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 12.41 |
| Power efficiency | 11.14 | 10.12 |
| Architecture | Pascal (2016−2021) | Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019) |
| GPU code name | GP100 | GM200 |
| Market segment | Workstation | Desktop |
| Release date | 1 October 2016 (9 years ago) | 2 June 2015 (11 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $649 |
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 | 3584 | 2816 |
| Core clock speed | 1304 MHz | 1000 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1442 MHz | 1075 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 15,300 million | 8,000 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 16 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 235 Watt | 250 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 323.0 | 189.4 |
| Floating-point processing power | 10.34 TFLOPS | 6.06 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 96 | 96 |
| TMUs | 224 | 176 |
| L1 Cache | 1.3 MB | 1 MB |
| L2 Cache | 4 MB | 3 MB |
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).
| Bus support | no data | PCI Express 3.0 |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Length | 267 mm | 267 mm |
| Height | no data | 4.376" (11.1 cm) |
| Width | 2-slot | 2-slot |
| Recommended system power (PSU) | no data | 600 Watt |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 8-pin | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-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 type | HBM2 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 16 GB | 6 GB |
| Memory bus width | 4096 Bit | 384 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 715 MHz | 7.0 GB/s |
| Memory bandwidth | 732.2 GB/s | 336.5 GB/s |
| 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 | 1x DVI, 4x DisplayPort | Dual Link DVI-I, HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.2 |
| Multi monitor support | no data | 4 displays |
| HDMI | - | + |
| HDCP | - | + |
| Maximum VGA resolution | no data | 2048x1536 |
| G-SYNC support | - | + |
| Audio input for HDMI | no data | Internal |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| GameStream | - | + |
| GeForce ShadowPlay | - | + |
| GPU Boost | no data | 2.0 |
| GameWorks | - | + |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 (12_1) |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | 6.8 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | 1.4 |
| CUDA | 6.0 | + |
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.
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.
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.
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.
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 | 100−110
+0%
| 100
+0%
|
| 1440p | 50−55
+2%
| 49
−2%
|
| 4K | 50−55
−2%
| 51
+2%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | no data | 6.49 |
| 1440p | no data | 13.24 |
| 4K | no data | 12.73 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 180−190
+0%
|
180−190
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 75−80
+0%
|
75−80
+0%
|
| Palworld | 85−90
+0%
|
85−90
+0%
|
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 85−90
+0%
|
85−90
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 120−130
+0%
|
120−130
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 180−190
+0%
|
180−190
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 75−80
+0%
|
75−80
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 100−110
+0%
|
100−110
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 140−150
+0%
|
140−150
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 120−130
+0%
|
120−130
+0%
|
| Palworld | 85−90
+0%
|
85−90
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 130−140
+0%
|
130−140
+0%
|
| Valorant | 200−210
+0%
|
200−210
+0%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 120−130
+0%
|
120−130
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 180−190
+0%
|
180−190
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 270−280
+0%
|
270−280
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 75−80
+0%
|
75−80
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 130−140
+0%
|
130−140
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 100−110
+0%
|
100−110
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 140−150
+0%
|
140−150
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 120−130
+0%
|
120−130
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 34
+0%
|
34
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 75−80
+0%
|
75−80
+0%
|
| Palworld | 85−90
+0%
|
85−90
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 130−140
+0%
|
130−140
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 110−120
+0%
|
110−120
+0%
|
| Valorant | 200−210
+0%
|
200−210
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 94
+0%
|
94
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 75−80
+0%
|
75−80
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 130−140
+0%
|
130−140
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 77
+0%
|
77
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 72
+0%
|
72
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 72
+0%
|
72
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 59
+0%
|
59
+0%
|
| Valorant | 200−210
+0%
|
200−210
+0%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 88
+0%
|
88
+0%
|
| Palworld | 85−90
+0%
|
85−90
+0%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 75−80
+0%
|
75−80
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 230−240
+0%
|
230−240
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 65−70
+0%
|
65−70
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 45−50
+0%
|
45−50
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 170−180
+0%
|
170−180
+0%
|
| Valorant | 230−240
+0%
|
230−240
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 85−90
+0%
|
85−90
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 35−40
+0%
|
35−40
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 75−80
+0%
|
75−80
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 90−95
+0%
|
90−95
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 55−60
+0%
|
55−60
+0%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 85−90
+0%
|
85−90
+0%
|
| Palworld | 45−50
+0%
|
45−50
+0%
|
4K
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 35−40
+0%
|
35−40
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 79
+0%
|
79
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 27−30
+0%
|
27−30
+0%
|
| Palworld | 27−30
+0%
|
27−30
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 44
+0%
|
44
+0%
|
| Valorant | 190−200
+0%
|
190−200
+0%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 40
+0%
|
40
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 35−40
+0%
|
35−40
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 16−18
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 132
+0%
|
132
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 30
+0%
|
30
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 42
+0%
|
42
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 26
+0%
|
26
+0%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 32
+0%
|
32
+0%
|
| Palworld | 27−30
+0%
|
27−30
+0%
|
This is how Quadro GP100 and GTX 980 Ti compete in popular games:
- A tie in 1080p
- Quadro GP100 is 2% faster in 1440p
- GTX 980 Ti is 2% faster in 4K
All in all, in popular games:
- there's a draw in 65 tests (100%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 33.83 | 32.69 |
| Recency | 1 October 2016 | 2 June 2015 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 16 GB | 6 GB |
| Chip lithography | 16 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 235 Watt | 250 Watt |
Quadro GP100 has a 3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, a 167% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 75% more advanced lithography process, and 6% lower power consumption.
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Quadro GP100 and GeForce GTX 980 Ti.
Be aware that Quadro GP100 is a workstation graphics card while GeForce GTX 980 Ti is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
