GeForce RTX 5080 vs 405M
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | 3 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 40.67 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 17.97 |
| Architecture | Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013) | Blackwell 2.0 (2025) |
| GPU code name | GT218 | GB203 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 5 January 2011 (14 years ago) | 30 January 2025 (recently) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $999 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices 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. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 16 | 10752 |
| Core clock speed | 606 MHz | 2295 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 2617 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 260 million | 45,600 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 4 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 14 Watt | 360 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 4.848 | 879.3 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.03878 TFLOPS | 56.28 TFLOPS |
| Gigaflops | 73 | no data |
| ROPs | 4 | 128 |
| TMUs | 8 | 336 |
| Tensor Cores | no data | 336 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 84 |
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 | PCI-E 2.0 | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 5.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 304 mm |
| Width | no data | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | 1x 16-pin |
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 | GDDR3 | GDDR7 |
| Maximum RAM amount | Up to 512 MB | 16 GB |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | Up to 800 (DDR3), Up to 800 (GDDR3) MHz | 1875 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 25.6 GB/s | 960.0 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 Connectors | DisplayPort, HDMI, VGA, Dual Link DVI, Single Link DVI | 1x HDMI 2.1b, 3x DisplayPort 2.1b |
| Multi monitor support | + | no data |
| HDMI | + | + |
| Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | no data |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| Power management | 8.0 | no data |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 API | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 4.1 | 6.8 |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.4 |
| CUDA | + | 10.1 |
| DLSS | - | + |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 5 January 2011 | 30 January 2025 |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 4 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 14 Watt | 360 Watt |
GeForce 405M has 2471.4% lower power consumption.
RTX 5080, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 14 years, and a 900% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between GeForce 405M and GeForce RTX 5080. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that GeForce 405M is a notebook card while GeForce RTX 5080 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.
