GeForce GTX 780M Mac Edition vs GT 1030

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GT 1030 with GeForce GTX 780M Mac Edition, including specs and performance data.

GT 1030
2017
4 GB GDDR5, 30 Watt
6.37

GTX 780M Mac Edition outperforms GT 1030 by a small 5% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking576563
Place by popularity36not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation2.31no data
Power efficiency14.543.76
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameGP108GK104
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date17 May 2017 (7 years ago)8 November 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$79 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores3841536
Core clock speed1228 MHz771 MHz
Boost clock speed1468 MHz797 MHz
Number of transistors1,800 million3,540 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)30 Watt122 Watt
Texture fill rate35.23102.0
Floating-point processing power1.127 TFLOPS2.448 TFLOPS
ROPs1632
TMUs24128

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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x4MXM-B (3.0)
Length145 mmno data
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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount4 GB4 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1502 MHz1250 MHz
Memory bandwidth48.06 GB/s160.0 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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMINo outputs
HDMI+-
G-SYNC support+-

Supported technologies

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

VR Ready+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (11_0)
Shader Model6.45.1
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.2.1311.1.126
CUDA6.13.0

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 HD24
+0%
24−27
+0%
1440p23
−4.3%
24−27
+4.3%
4K8
+0%
8−9
+0%

Cost per frame, $

1080p3.29no data
1440p3.43no data
4K9.88no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 15
+7.1%
14−16
−7.1%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18
+0%
18−20
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Battlefield 5 22
+4.8%
21−24
−4.8%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18
+0%
18−20
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 11
+10%
10−11
−10%
Far Cry 5 21
+0%
21−24
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 27
+0%
27−30
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 93
−2.2%
95−100
+2.2%
Hitman 3 16
+0%
16−18
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 152
+1.3%
150−160
−1.3%
Metro Exodus 26
−3.8%
27−30
+3.8%
Red Dead Redemption 2 31
+3.3%
30−33
−3.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 37
+5.7%
35−40
−5.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion 93
−2.2%
95−100
+2.2%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 24
+0%
24−27
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Battlefield 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16
+0%
16−18
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 7
+0%
7−8
+0%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 20
−5%
21−24
+5%
Forza Horizon 4 84
−1.2%
85−90
+1.2%
Hitman 3 15
+7.1%
14−16
−7.1%
Horizon Zero Dawn 123
+2.5%
120−130
−2.5%
Metro Exodus 20
−5%
21−24
+5%
Red Dead Redemption 2 15
+7.1%
14−16
−7.1%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 19
+5.6%
18−20
−5.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 20−22
−5%
21−24
+5%
Watch Dogs: Legion 84
−1.2%
85−90
+1.2%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7
+0%
7−8
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5
+0%
5−6
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 16
+0%
16−18
+0%
Hitman 3 12−14
+8.3%
12−14
−8.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 19
+5.6%
18−20
−5.6%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12
+0%
12−14
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 6
+0%
6−7
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 19
+5.6%
18−20
−5.6%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 20−22
−5%
21−24
+5%
Hitman 3 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14
+0%
14−16
+0%
Metro Exodus 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 11
+10%
10−11
−10%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 48
−4.2%
50−55
+4.2%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 10−12
+10%
10−11
−10%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 4
+0%
4−5
+0%
Hitman 3 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
+6.3%
16−18
−6.3%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1
+0%
1−2
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 7
+0%
7−8
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6
+0%
6−7
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

This is how GT 1030 and GTX 780M Mac Edition compete in popular games:

  • A tie in 1080p
  • GTX 780M Mac Edition is 4% faster in 1440p
  • A tie in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 6.37 6.70
Recency 17 May 2017 8 November 2013
Chip lithography 14 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 30 Watt 122 Watt

GT 1030 has an age advantage of 3 years, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 306.7% lower power consumption.

GTX 780M Mac Edition, on the other hand, has a 5.2% higher aggregate performance score.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between GeForce GT 1030 and GeForce GTX 780M Mac Edition.

Be aware that GeForce GT 1030 is a desktop card while GeForce GTX 780M Mac Edition is a notebook 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 GeForce GT 1030
GeForce GT 1030
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M Mac Edition
GeForce GTX 780M Mac Edition

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


3.3 7838 votes

Rate GeForce GT 1030 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.6 8 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 780M Mac Edition 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.