GeForce GTX 980M SLI vs 1060 6 GB
Aggregated performance score
1060 6 GB outperforms 980M SLI by 8% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
Primary Details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in performance ranking | 186 | 205 |
| Place by popularity | 9 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation | 3.21 | 18.66 |
| Architecture | Pascal (2016−2021) | Maxwell (2014−2018) |
| GPU code name | GP106 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop | Laptop |
| Release date | 19 July 2016 (7 years ago) | 7 October 2014 (9 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $299 | no data |
| Current price | $911 (3x MSRP) | $499 |
Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation
Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
GTX 980M SLI has 481% better value for money than GTX 1060 6 GB.
Detailed Specifications
General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 1280 | 3072 |
| Core clock speed | 1506 MHz | 1038 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1708 MHz | 1127 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 4,400 million | 2x 5200 Million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 16 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 120 Watt | 200 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 136.7 | no data |
| Floating-point performance | 4,375 gflops | no data |
Form Factor & Compatibility
Information on GeForce GTX 1060 6 GB and GeForce GTX 980M SLI compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.
| Laptop size | no data | large |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | no data |
| Length | 250 mm | no data |
| Width | 2-slot | no data |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin | no data |
| SLI options | no data | + |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 6 GB | 2x 8 GB |
| Memory bus width | 192 Bit | 2x 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 8000 MHz | 5000 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 192.2 GB/s | no data |
| 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 | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort | no data |
| HDMI | + | no data |
| G-SYNC support | + | no data |
Supported GPU Technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| Optimus | no data | + |
| VR Ready | + | no data |
API Compatibility
List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12_1 |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | no data |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | no data |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | no data |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | + |
| CUDA | 6.1 | + |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark performance score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.
1060 6 GB outperforms 980M SLI by 8% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
3DMark Vantage Performance
3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.
Benchmark coverage: 17%
1060 6 GB outperforms 980M SLI by 17% in 3DMark Vantage Performance.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 17%
980M SLI outperforms 1060 6 GB by 26% in 3DMark 11 Performance GPU.
3DMark Fire Strike Graphics
Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.
Benchmark coverage: 14%
980M SLI outperforms 1060 6 GB by 43% in 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics.
3DMark Cloud Gate GPU
Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.
Benchmark coverage: 14%
980M SLI outperforms 1060 6 GB by 61% in 3DMark Cloud Gate GPU.
Unigine Heaven 3.0
This is an old DirectX 11 benchmark using Unigine, a 3D game engine by eponymous Russian company. It displays a fantasy medieval town sprawling over several flying islands. Version 3.0 was released in 2012, and in 2013 it was superseded by Heaven 4.0, which introduced several slight improvements, including a newer version of Unigine.
Benchmark coverage: 4%
1060 6 GB outperforms 980M SLI by 4229% in Unigine Heaven 3.0.
SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 maya-04
Benchmark coverage: 3%
1060 6 GB outperforms 980M SLI by 28% in SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 maya-04.
SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 sw-03
Benchmark coverage: 3%
1060 6 GB outperforms 980M SLI by 9% in SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 sw-03.
SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 snx-02
Benchmark coverage: 3%
1060 6 GB outperforms 980M SLI by 20% in SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 snx-02.
SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 catia-04
Benchmark coverage: 3%
1060 6 GB outperforms 980M SLI by 29% in SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 catia-04.
SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 creo-01
Benchmark coverage: 3%
1060 6 GB outperforms 980M SLI by 25% in SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 creo-01.
SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 mediacal-01
Benchmark coverage: 3%
1060 6 GB outperforms 980M SLI by 42% in SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 mediacal-01.
SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 showcase-01
Benchmark coverage: 3%
1060 6 GB outperforms 980M SLI by 42% in SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 showcase-01.
SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 energy-01
Benchmark coverage: 3%
1060 6 GB outperforms 980M SLI by 186% in SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 energy-01.
SPECviewperf 12 - Showcase
Benchmark coverage: 2%
1060 6 GB outperforms 980M SLI by 42% in SPECviewperf 12 - Showcase.
SPECviewperf 12 - Maya
This part of SPECviewperf 12 workstation benchmark uses Autodesk Maya 13 engine to render a superhero energy plant static scene consisting of more than 700 thousand polygons, in six different modes.
Benchmark coverage: 2%
1060 6 GB outperforms 980M SLI by 28% in SPECviewperf 12 - Maya.
SPECviewperf 12 - Catia
Benchmark coverage: 2%
1060 6 GB outperforms 980M SLI by 29% in SPECviewperf 12 - Catia.
SPECviewperf 12 - Solidworks
Benchmark coverage: 2%
1060 6 GB outperforms 980M SLI by 9% in SPECviewperf 12 - Solidworks.
SPECviewperf 12 - Siemens NX
Benchmark coverage: 2%
1060 6 GB outperforms 980M SLI by 20% in SPECviewperf 12 - Siemens NX.
SPECviewperf 12 - Creo
Benchmark coverage: 2%
1060 6 GB outperforms 980M SLI by 25% in SPECviewperf 12 - Creo.
SPECviewperf 12 - Medical
Benchmark coverage: 2%
1060 6 GB outperforms 980M SLI by 42% in SPECviewperf 12 - Medical.
SPECviewperf 12 - Energy
Benchmark coverage: 2%
1060 6 GB outperforms 980M SLI by 186% in SPECviewperf 12 - Energy.
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 | 140−150
+3.7%
| 135
−3.7%
|
| Full HD | 92
−19.6%
| 110
+19.6%
|
| 1440p | 49
+8.9%
| 45−50
−8.9%
|
| 4K | 32
+18.5%
| 27−30
−18.5%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 40−45
+10%
|
40−45
−10%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 72
+50%
|
45−50
−50%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 45−50
+9.3%
|
40−45
−9.3%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 106
+32.5%
|
80−85
−32.5%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 78
+21.9%
|
60−65
−21.9%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 40−45
+10%
|
40−45
−10%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 82
+28.1%
|
60−65
−28.1%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 81
+24.6%
|
65−70
−24.6%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 100
+22%
|
80−85
−22%
|
| Hitman 3 | 80−85
+9.6%
|
70−75
−9.6%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 55−60
+9.6%
|
50−55
−9.6%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 56
+40%
|
40−45
−40%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 68
+25.9%
|
50−55
−25.9%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 50−55
+8.5%
|
45−50
−8.5%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 61
+27.1%
|
45−50
−27.1%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 45−50
+9.3%
|
40−45
−9.3%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 86
+7.5%
|
80−85
−7.5%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 64
+0%
|
60−65
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 40−45
+10%
|
40−45
−10%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 75
+17.2%
|
60−65
−17.2%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 75
+15.4%
|
65−70
−15.4%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 93
+13.4%
|
80−85
−13.4%
|
| Hitman 3 | 80−85
+9.6%
|
70−75
−9.6%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 55−60
+9.6%
|
50−55
−9.6%
|
| Metro Exodus | 43
+4.9%
|
40−45
−4.9%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 30
−33.3%
|
40−45
+33.3%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 58
+7.4%
|
50−55
−7.4%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 76
+38.2%
|
55−60
−38.2%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 50−55
+8.5%
|
45−50
−8.5%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 38
−26.3%
|
45−50
+26.3%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 45−50
+9.3%
|
40−45
−9.3%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 78
−2.6%
|
80−85
+2.6%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 40−45
+10%
|
40−45
−10%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 70
+9.4%
|
60−65
−9.4%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 69
+6.2%
|
65−70
−6.2%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 73
−12.3%
|
80−85
+12.3%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 44
−25%
|
55−60
+25%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 50−55
+8.5%
|
45−50
−8.5%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 41
+7.9%
|
35−40
−7.9%
|
| Hitman 3 | 45−50
+9.8%
|
40−45
−9.8%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 35−40
+6.1%
|
30−35
−6.1%
|
| Metro Exodus | 26
+8.3%
|
24−27
−8.3%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 19
+0%
|
18−20
+0%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 34
+3%
|
30−35
−3%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 32
+23.1%
|
24−27
−23.1%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 27−30
+12.5%
|
24−27
−12.5%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 58
+5.5%
|
55−60
−5.5%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 16−18
+6.3%
|
16−18
−6.3%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 47
+11.9%
|
40−45
−11.9%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 50
+6.4%
|
45−50
−6.4%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 57
+14%
|
50−55
−14%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 30−35
+13.8%
|
27−30
−13.8%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 21−24
+10.5%
|
18−20
−10.5%
|
4K
High Preset
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 22
+15.8%
|
18−20
−15.8%
|
| Hitman 3 | 24−27
+8.7%
|
21−24
−8.7%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 18−20
+12.5%
|
16−18
−12.5%
|
| Metro Exodus | 16
+6.7%
|
14−16
−6.7%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 12
−8.3%
|
12−14
+8.3%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 17
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 29
+11.5%
|
24−27
−11.5%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 18
+20%
|
14−16
−20%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 14−16
+15.4%
|
12−14
−15.4%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 31
+6.9%
|
27−30
−6.9%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 7−8
+16.7%
|
6−7
−16.7%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 23
+9.5%
|
21−24
−9.5%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 26
+8.3%
|
24−27
−8.3%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 38
+8.6%
|
35−40
−8.6%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 12−14
+9.1%
|
10−12
−9.1%
|
This is how GTX 1060 6 GB and GTX 980M SLI compete in popular games:
- GTX 1060 6 GB is 3.7% faster than GTX 980M SLI in 900p
- GTX 980M SLI is 19.6% faster than GTX 1060 6 GB in 1080p
- GTX 1060 6 GB is 8.9% faster than GTX 980M SLI in 1440p
- GTX 1060 6 GB is 18.5% faster than GTX 980M SLI in 4K
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Assassin's Creed Odyssey, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the GTX 1060 6 GB is 50% faster than the GTX 980M SLI.
- in Red Dead Redemption 2, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the GTX 980M SLI is 33.3% faster than the GTX 1060 6 GB.
All in all, in popular games:
- GTX 1060 6 GB is ahead in 59 tests (87%)
- GTX 980M SLI is ahead in 6 tests (9%)
- there's a draw in 3 tests (4%)
Pros & Cons Summary
| Performance score | 26.48 | 24.50 |
| Recency | 19 July 2016 | 7 October 2014 |
| Chip lithography | 16 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 120 Watt | 200 Watt |
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between GeForce GTX 1060 6 GB and GeForce GTX 980M SLI.
Be aware that GeForce GTX 1060 6 GB is a desktop card while GeForce GTX 980M SLI is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Comparisons with Similar GPUs
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
