GeForce 9300M G vs GTX 980 SLI Mobile
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce GTX 980 SLI Mobile and GeForce 9300M G, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
980 SLI Mobile outperforms 9300M G by a whopping 18170% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 146 | 1446 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 8.50 | 1.18 |
| Architecture | Maxwell (2014−2017) | Tesla (2006−2010) |
| GPU code name | N16E-GXX SLI | G86 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 22 September 2015 (10 years ago) | 1 February 2008 (17 years ago) |
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 cores | 4096 | 16 |
| Core clock speed | 1126 MHz | 400 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1228 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | 10400 Million | 210 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 80 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 330 Watt | 13 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 3.200 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 0.0256 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | no data | 4 |
| TMUs | no data | 8 |
| L2 Cache | no data | 16 KB |
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 size | large | no data |
| Interface | no data | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| 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 type | GDDR5 | GDDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2x 8 GB | 256 MB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 3500 MHz | 600 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 9.6 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
| Display Connectors | no data | No outputs |
| G-SYNC support | + | - |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12_1 | 11.1 (10_0) |
| Shader Model | no data | 4.0 |
| OpenGL | no data | 3.3 |
| OpenCL | no data | 1.1 |
| Vulkan | - | N/A |
| CUDA | + | 1.1 |
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 | 0−1 |
| 4K | 68 | -0−1 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 200−210
+20400%
|
1−2
−20400%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 85−90
+8400%
|
1−2
−8400%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 120−130 | 0−1 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 200−210
+20400%
|
1−2
−20400%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 85−90
+8400%
|
1−2
−8400%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 120−130 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 110−120 | 0−1 |
| Fortnite | 160−170 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 140−150
+4667%
|
3−4
−4667%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 110−120 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 140−150
+2000%
|
7−8
−2000%
|
| Valorant | 210−220
+776%
|
24−27
−776%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 120−130 | 0−1 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 200−210
+20400%
|
1−2
−20400%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 270−280
+2217%
|
12−14
−2217%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 85−90
+8400%
|
1−2
−8400%
|
| Dota 2 | 140−150
+1489%
|
9−10
−1489%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 120−130 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 110−120 | 0−1 |
| Fortnite | 160−170 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 140−150
+4667%
|
3−4
−4667%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 110−120 | 0−1 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 120−130 | 0−1 |
| Metro Exodus | 85−90 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 140−150
+2000%
|
7−8
−2000%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 132
+2540%
|
5−6
−2540%
|
| Valorant | 210−220
+776%
|
24−27
−776%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 120−130 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 85−90
+8400%
|
1−2
−8400%
|
| Dota 2 | 140−150
+1489%
|
9−10
−1489%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 120−130 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 110−120 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 140−150
+4667%
|
3−4
−4667%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 140−150
+2000%
|
7−8
−2000%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 74
+1380%
|
5−6
−1380%
|
| Valorant | 210−220
+776%
|
24−27
−776%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 160−170 | 0−1 |
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 90−95
+4450%
|
2−3
−4450%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 250−260
+25800%
|
1−2
−25800%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 75−80 | 0−1 |
| Metro Exodus | 50−55 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 170−180
+8650%
|
2−3
−8650%
|
| Valorant | 250−260
+25000%
|
1−2
−25000%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 95−100 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 40−45 | 0−1 |
| Escape from Tarkov | 85−90
+4300%
|
2−3
−4300%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 85−90 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 100−110
+10300%
|
1−2
−10300%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 65−70
+6700%
|
1−2
−6700%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 95−100 | 0−1 |
4K
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 40−45 | 0−1 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 75−80
+464%
|
14−16
−464%
|
| Metro Exodus | 30−35 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 51 | 0−1 |
| Valorant | 220−230
+22400%
|
1−2
−22400%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 55−60 | 0−1 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 40−45 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 18−20 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 100−110 | 0−1 |
| Escape from Tarkov | 45−50 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 45−50 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 65−70 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 45−50
+4700%
|
1−2
−4700%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 45−50
+2250%
|
2−3
−2250%
|
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Valorant, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the GTX 980 SLI Mobile is 22400% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Without exception, GTX 980 SLI Mobile surpassed 9300M G in all 27 of our tests.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 36.54 | 0.20 |
| Recency | 22 September 2015 | 1 February 2008 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 80 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 330 Watt | 13 Watt |
GTX 980 SLI Mobile has a 18170% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, and a 185.7% more advanced lithography process.
9300M G, on the other hand, has 2438.5% lower power consumption.
The GeForce GTX 980 SLI Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 9300M G in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
