780M vs 480

#ad
Buy
VS

Combined performance score

GTX 480
10.58
+5.8%

480 outperforms 780M by 6% in our combined benchmark results.

General info

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

Place in performance ranking395411
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Value for money1.271.35
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameGF100N14E-GTX
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date7 December 2010 (13 years old)30 May 2013 (10 years old)
Launch price (MSRP)$499 no data
Current price$15.99 (0x MSRP)$1093
Value for money

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTX 780M has 6% better value for money than GTX 480.

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 cores4801536
CUDA cores4801536
Core clock speed700 MHz823 MHz
Boost clock speedno data797 MHz
Number of transistors3,100 million3,540 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)295 Watt122 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature105 °Cno data
Texture fill rate42 billion/sec102.0
Floating-point performance1,345.0 gflops2,448 gflops

Size and compatibility

Information on GeForce GTX 480 and GeForce GTX 780M 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 sizeno datalarge
Bus support16x PCI-E 2.0PCI Express 3.0, PCI Express 2.0
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16MXM-B (3.0)
Length10.5" (267 mm) (26.7 cm)no data
Height4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors6-pin & 8-pinNone
SLI options++

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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount1536 MB4 GB
Standard memory configurationno dataGDDR5
Memory bus width384 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1848 MHz (3696 data rate)2500 MHz
Memory bandwidth177.4 GB/s160.0 GB/s
Shared memory--

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 ConnectorsTwo Dual Link DVI, Mini HDMINo outputs
Multi monitor support+no data
eDP 1.2 signal supportno dataUp to 3840x2160
LVDS signal supportno dataUp to 1920x1200
VGA аnalog display supportno dataUp to 2048x1536
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) supportno dataUp to 3840x2160
HDMI++
HDCP+no data
HDCP content protectionno data+
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIInternalno data
7.1 channel HD audio on HDMIno data+
TrueHD and DTS-HD audio bitstreamingno data+

Technologies

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

Blu-Ray 3D Supportno data+
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoderno data+
Optimusno data+
3D Vision / 3DTV Playno data+

API support

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 API
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.24.5
OpenCL1.11.1
VulkanN/A1.1.126
CUDA++

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.

GTX 480 10.58
+5.8%
GTX 780M 10.00

480 outperforms 780M by 6% in our combined benchmark results.


Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

GTX 480 4100
+5.7%
GTX 780M 3878

480 outperforms 780M by 6% in Passmark.

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%

GTX 480 5014
GTX 780M 7777
+55.1%

780M outperforms 480 by 55% 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%

GTX 480 3650
GTX 780M 5244
+43.7%

780M outperforms 480 by 44% in 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 9%

GTX 480 13118
+5.3%
GTX 780M 12452

480 outperforms 780M by 5% in GeekBench 5 OpenCL.

Octane Render OctaneBench

This is a special benchmark measuring graphics card performance in OctaneRender, which is a realistic GPU rendering engine by OTOY Inc., available either as a standalone program, or as a plugin for 3DS Max, Cinema 4D and many other apps. It renders four different static scenes, then compares render times with a reference GPU which is currently GeForce GTX 980. This benchmark has nothing to do with gaming and is aimed at professional 3D graphics artists.

Benchmark coverage: 4%

GTX 480 54
+45.9%
GTX 780M 37

480 outperforms 780M by 46% in Octane Render OctaneBench.

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 HD65−70
−1.5%
66
+1.5%

Performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+6.7%
14−16
−6.7%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 21−24
+4.8%
21−24
−4.8%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18
+6.7%
14−16
−6.7%
Battlefield 5 35−40
+5.9%
30−35
−5.9%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 27−30
+3.7%
27−30
−3.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+6.7%
14−16
−6.7%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+8%
24−27
−8%
Far Cry New Dawn 27−30
+3.7%
27−30
−3.7%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+5.7%
35−40
−5.7%
Hitman 3 27−30
+3.8%
24−27
−3.8%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+10%
20−22
−10%
Red Dead Redemption 2 18−20
+5.9%
16−18
−5.9%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 21−24
+4.8%
21−24
−4.8%
Watch Dogs: Legion 18−20
+5.6%
18−20
−5.6%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 21−24
+4.8%
21−24
−4.8%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18
+6.7%
14−16
−6.7%
Battlefield 5 35−40
+5.9%
30−35
−5.9%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 27−30
+3.7%
27−30
−3.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+6.7%
14−16
−6.7%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+8%
24−27
−8%
Far Cry New Dawn 27−30
+3.7%
27−30
−3.7%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+5.7%
35−40
−5.7%
Hitman 3 27−30
+3.8%
24−27
−3.8%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+10%
20−22
−10%
Metro Exodus 16−18
+6.7%
14−16
−6.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2 18−20
+5.9%
16−18
−5.9%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 21−24
+4.8%
21−24
−4.8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
−59.1%
35
+59.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion 18−20
+5.6%
18−20
−5.6%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 21−24
+4.8%
21−24
−4.8%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18
+6.7%
14−16
−6.7%
Battlefield 5 35−40
+5.9%
30−35
−5.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+6.7%
14−16
−6.7%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+8%
24−27
−8%
Far Cry New Dawn 27−30
+3.7%
27−30
−3.7%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+5.7%
35−40
−5.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+29.4%
17
−29.4%
Watch Dogs: Legion 18−20
+5.6%
18−20
−5.6%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Hitman 3 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Metro Exodus 9−10
+12.5%
8−9
−12.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 14−16
+7.7%
12−14
−7.7%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Battlefield 5 18−20
+11.8%
16−18
−11.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+6.3%
16−18
−6.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 18−20
+12.5%
16−18
−12.5%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+5.6%
18−20
−5.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Hitman 3 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
Horizon Zero Dawn 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Metro Exodus 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Battlefield 5 9−10
+12.5%
8−9
−12.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+12.5%
8−9
−12.5%
Far Cry New Dawn 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+8.3%
12−14
−8.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

This is how GTX 480 and GTX 780M compete in popular games:

1080p resolution:

  • GTX 780M is 1.5% faster than GTX 480

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GTX 480 is 29.4% faster than the GTX 780M.
  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the GTX 780M is 59.1% faster than the GTX 480.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GTX 480 is ahead in 53 tests (78%)
  • GTX 780M is ahead in 1 test (1%)
  • there's a draw in 14 tests (21%)

Advantages and disadvantages


Performance score 10.58 10.00
Recency 7 December 2010 30 May 2013
Maximum RAM amount 1536 MB 4 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 295 Watt 122 Watt

We couldn't decide between GeForce GTX 480 and GeForce GTX 780M. The differences in performance seem too small.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 480 is a desktop card while GeForce GTX 780M is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

User ratings

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce GTX 480
GeForce GTX 480
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M
GeForce GTX 780M

Similar GPU comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

User ratings: view and submit

Here you can see the user rating of the graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.4 194 votes

Rate NVIDIA GeForce GTX 480 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2 104 votes

Rate NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions and comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.