GeForce GTX TITAN X vs 1080 SLI Mobile
Aggregated performance score
1080 SLI Mobile outperforms TITAN X by 11% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
General info
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in performance ranking | 117 | 146 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Value for money | 66.22 | 15.36 |
| Architecture | Pascal (2016−2021) | Maxwell 2.0 (2015−2019) |
| GPU code name | Pascal GP104 SLI | GM200 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 16 August 2016 (7 years ago) | 17 March 2015 (9 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $999 |
| Current price | $352 | $290 (0.3x MSRP) |
Value for money
Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
GTX 1080 SLI Mobile has 331% better value for money than GTX TITAN X.
Technical specs
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 | 5120 | 3072 |
| CUDA cores | no data | 3072 |
| Core clock speed | 1556 MHz | 1000 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1733 MHz | 1075 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 14400 Million | 8,000 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 16 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | no data | 250 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 192 billion/sec |
| Floating-point performance | no data | 6,691 gflops |
Size and compatibility
Information on GeForce GTX 1080 SLI Mobile and GeForce GTX TITAN X 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 | large | no data |
| Bus support | no data | PCI Express 3.0 |
| Interface | no data | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 10.5" (26.7 cm) |
| Height | no data | 4.376" (11.1 cm) |
| Width | no data | 2-slot |
| Recommended system power (PSU) | no data | 600 Watt |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | 6-pin + 8-pin |
| SLI options | + | 4x |
Memory
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 | 2x 8 GB | 12 GB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 384 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 10000 MHz | 7.0 GB/s |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 336.5 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | no data |
Video outputs and ports
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 | no data | Dual Link DVI-I, HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.2 |
| Multi monitor support | no data | 4 displays |
| HDMI | no data | + |
| HDCP | no data | + |
| Maximum VGA resolution | no data | 2048x1536 |
| G-SYNC support | + | no data |
| Audio input for HDMI | no data | Internal |
Technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| GameStream | no data | + |
| GeForce ShadowPlay | no data | + |
| GPU Boost | no data | 2.0 |
| GameWorks | no data | + |
| VR Ready | + | no data |
API support
List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12_1 | 12 (12_1) |
| Shader Model | no data | 6.4 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.5 |
| OpenCL | no data | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | + | 1.1.126 |
| CUDA | + | + |
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 | 137
+14.2%
| 120−130
−14.2%
|
| 4K | 89
+11.3%
| 80−85
−11.3%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 65−70
+20%
|
55−60
−20%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 65−70
+11.7%
|
60−65
−11.7%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 65−70
+20%
|
55−60
−20%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 110−120
+15.8%
|
95−100
−15.8%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 100−110
+13.3%
|
90−95
−13.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 65−70
+20%
|
55−60
−20%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 95−100
+11.8%
|
85−90
−11.8%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 90−95
+13.8%
|
80−85
−13.8%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 110−120
+16%
|
100−105
−16%
|
| Hitman 3 | 110−120
+19%
|
100−105
−19%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 80−85
+15.7%
|
70−75
−15.7%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 60−65
+20%
|
50−55
−20%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 90−95
+12.5%
|
80−85
−12.5%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 70−75
+16.7%
|
60−65
−16.7%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 65−70
+11.7%
|
60−65
−11.7%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 65−70
+20%
|
55−60
−20%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 110−120
+15.8%
|
95−100
−15.8%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 100−110
+13.3%
|
90−95
−13.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 65−70
+20%
|
55−60
−20%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 95−100
+11.8%
|
85−90
−11.8%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 90−95
+13.8%
|
80−85
−13.8%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 110−120
+16%
|
100−105
−16%
|
| Hitman 3 | 110−120
+19%
|
100−105
−19%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 80−85
+15.7%
|
70−75
−15.7%
|
| Metro Exodus | 65−70
+11.7%
|
60−65
−11.7%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 60−65
+20%
|
50−55
−20%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 90−95
+12.5%
|
80−85
−12.5%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 181
+13.1%
|
160−170
−13.1%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 70−75
+16.7%
|
60−65
−16.7%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 65−70
+11.7%
|
60−65
−11.7%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 65−70
+20%
|
55−60
−20%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 110−120
+15.8%
|
95−100
−15.8%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 65−70
+20%
|
55−60
−20%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 95−100
+11.8%
|
85−90
−11.8%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 90−95
+13.8%
|
80−85
−13.8%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 110−120
+16%
|
100−105
−16%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 115
+15%
|
100−105
−15%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 70−75
+16.7%
|
60−65
−16.7%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 60−65
+12.7%
|
55−60
−12.7%
|
| Hitman 3 | 65−70
+15%
|
60−65
−15%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 50−55
+15.6%
|
45−50
−15.6%
|
| Metro Exodus | 40−45
+17.1%
|
35−40
−17.1%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 30−33
+25%
|
24−27
−25%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 55−60
+12%
|
50−55
−12%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 40−45
+17.1%
|
35−40
−17.1%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 40−45
+17.1%
|
35−40
−17.1%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 75−80
+12.9%
|
70−75
−12.9%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 27−30
+20.8%
|
24−27
−20.8%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 65−70
+13.3%
|
60−65
−13.3%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 70−75
+18.3%
|
60−65
−18.3%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 75−80
+12.9%
|
70−75
−12.9%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 50−55
+17.8%
|
45−50
−17.8%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 30−35
+22.2%
|
27−30
−22.2%
|
4K
High Preset
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 30−35
+22.2%
|
27−30
−22.2%
|
| Hitman 3 | 35−40
+23.3%
|
30−33
−23.3%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 27−30
+16.7%
|
24−27
−16.7%
|
| Metro Exodus | 24−27
+23.8%
|
21−24
−23.8%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 20−22
+25%
|
16−18
−25%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 27−30
+20.8%
|
24−27
−20.8%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 87
+16%
|
75−80
−16%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 24−27
+19%
|
21−24
−19%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 21−24
+27.8%
|
18−20
−27.8%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 45−50
+15%
|
40−45
−15%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 12−14
+20%
|
10−11
−20%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 35−40
+16.7%
|
30−33
−16.7%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 35−40
+11.4%
|
35−40
−11.4%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 50−55
+15.6%
|
45−50
−15.6%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 18−20
+18.8%
|
16−18
−18.8%
|
This is how GTX 1080 SLI Mobile and GTX TITAN X compete in popular games:
- GTX 1080 SLI Mobile is 14.2% faster than GTX TITAN X in 1080p
- GTX 1080 SLI Mobile is 11.3% faster than GTX TITAN X in 4K
Advantages and disadvantages
| Performance score | 37.48 | 33.69 |
| Recency | 16 August 2016 | 17 March 2015 |
| Chip lithography | 16 nm | 28 nm |
The GeForce GTX 1080 SLI Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX TITAN X in performance tests.
Be aware that GeForce GTX 1080 SLI Mobile is a notebook card while GeForce GTX TITAN X is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Similar GPU comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
