GRID K120Q vs GeForce GTX 980 SLI Mobile

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 980 SLI Mobile with GRID K120Q, including specs and performance data.

GTX 980 SLI Mobile
2015
2x 8 GB GDDR5, 330 Watt
33.90
+5036%

GTX 980 SLI Mobile outperforms GRID K120Q by a whopping 5036% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1201166
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.06
Power efficiency8.190.40
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2017)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameN16E-GXX SLIGK107
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date22 September 2015 (9 years ago)2 July 2014 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$125

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

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 cores4096192
Core clock speed1126 MHz850 MHz
Boost clock speed1228 MHzno data
Number of transistors10400 Million1,270 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)330 Watt130 Watt
Texture fill rateno data13.60
Floating-point processing powerno data0.3264 TFLOPS
ROPsno data16
TMUsno data16

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).

Laptop sizelargeno data
Interfaceno dataPCIe 3.0 x16
Widthno dataIGP
SLI options+-

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 typeGDDR5DDR3
Maximum RAM amount2x 8 GB512 MB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed3500 MHz891 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data28.51 GB/s
Shared memory-no data

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 Connectorsno dataNo outputs
G-SYNC support+-

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12_112 (11_0)
Shader Modelno data5.1
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data1.2
Vulkan-1.1.126
CUDA+3.0

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 HD137
+6750%
2−3
−6750%
4K68
+6700%
1−2
−6700%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data62.50
4Kno data125.00

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 100−110
+5350%
2−3
−5350%
Counter-Strike 2 200−210
+5100%
4−5
−5100%
Cyberpunk 2077 80−85
+8300%
1−2
−8300%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 100−110
+5350%
2−3
−5350%
Battlefield 5 120−130
+6250%
2−3
−6250%
Counter-Strike 2 200−210
+5100%
4−5
−5100%
Cyberpunk 2077 80−85
+8300%
1−2
−8300%
Far Cry 5 110−120
+5650%
2−3
−5650%
Fortnite 160−170
+5233%
3−4
−5233%
Forza Horizon 4 140−150
+6950%
2−3
−6950%
Forza Horizon 5 110−120
+5600%
2−3
−5600%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 140−150
+7150%
2−3
−7150%
Valorant 210−220
+5325%
4−5
−5325%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 100−110
+5350%
2−3
−5350%
Battlefield 5 120−130
+6250%
2−3
−6250%
Counter-Strike 2 200−210
+5100%
4−5
−5100%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+5440%
5−6
−5440%
Cyberpunk 2077 80−85
+8300%
1−2
−8300%
Dota 2 140−150
+7000%
2−3
−7000%
Far Cry 5 110−120
+5650%
2−3
−5650%
Fortnite 160−170
+5233%
3−4
−5233%
Forza Horizon 4 140−150
+6950%
2−3
−6950%
Forza Horizon 5 110−120
+5600%
2−3
−5600%
Grand Theft Auto V 120−130
+6050%
2−3
−6050%
Metro Exodus 85−90
+8500%
1−2
−8500%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 140−150
+7150%
2−3
−7150%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 132
+6500%
2−3
−6500%
Valorant 210−220
+5325%
4−5
−5325%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 120−130
+6250%
2−3
−6250%
Cyberpunk 2077 80−85
+8300%
1−2
−8300%
Dota 2 140−150
+7000%
2−3
−7000%
Far Cry 5 110−120
+5650%
2−3
−5650%
Forza Horizon 4 140−150
+6950%
2−3
−6950%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 140−150
+7150%
2−3
−7150%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 74
+7300%
1−2
−7300%
Valorant 210−220
+5325%
4−5
−5325%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 160−170
+5233%
3−4
−5233%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 90−95
+9200%
1−2
−9200%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 250−260
+6175%
4−5
−6175%
Grand Theft Auto V 70−75
+7200%
1−2
−7200%
Metro Exodus 50−55
+5200%
1−2
−5200%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+5733%
3−4
−5733%
Valorant 250−260
+6150%
4−5
−6150%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 90−95
+9300%
1−2
−9300%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45 0−1
Far Cry 5 85−90
+8600%
1−2
−8600%
Forza Horizon 4 100−110
+5050%
2−3
−5050%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 65−70
+6700%
1−2
−6700%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 95−100
+9400%
1−2
−9400%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 27−30 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 40−45 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 75−80
+7700%
1−2
−7700%
Metro Exodus 30−35 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 51 0−1
Valorant 220−230
+5450%
4−5
−5450%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 55−60
+5700%
1−2
−5700%
Counter-Strike 2 40−45 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20 0−1
Dota 2 100−110
+5200%
2−3
−5200%
Far Cry 5 45−50 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 65−70
+6700%
1−2
−6700%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 45−50 0−1

This is how GTX 980 SLI Mobile and GRID K120Q compete in popular games:

  • GTX 980 SLI Mobile is 6750% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 980 SLI Mobile is 6700% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 33.90 0.66
Recency 22 September 2015 2 July 2014
Power consumption (TDP) 330 Watt 130 Watt

GTX 980 SLI Mobile has a 5036.4% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 1 year.

GRID K120Q, on the other hand, has 153.8% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 980 SLI Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the GRID K120Q in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 980 SLI Mobile is a notebook card while GRID K120Q is a workstation one.

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 GTX 980 SLI Mobile
GeForce GTX 980 SLI
NVIDIA GRID K120Q
GRID K120Q

Other comparisons

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.


3.2 70 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 980 SLI Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
1.5 2 votes

Rate GRID K120Q on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GTX 980 SLI Mobile or GRID K120Q, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.