GeForce GT 230M vs GTX 980 SLI Mobile
Aggregated performance score
GTX 980 SLI Mobile outperforms GT 230M by 6953% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
General info
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in performance ranking | 108 | 1173 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Value for money | 77.84 | 0.09 |
| Architecture | Maxwell (2014−2018) | GT2xx (2009−2012) |
| GPU code name | N16E-GXX SLI | N10P-GE |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 22 September 2015 (8 years ago) | 15 June 2009 (14 years ago) |
| Current price | $301 | $57 |
Value for money
Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
GTX 980 SLI Mobile has 86389% better value for money than GT 230M.
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 | 4096 | 48 |
| CUDA cores | no data | 48 |
| Core clock speed | 1126 MHz | 500 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1228 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | 10400 Million | 486 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 330 Watt | 23 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 8.000 |
| Floating-point performance | no data | 105.6 gflops |
| Gigaflops | no data | 158 |
Size and compatibility
Information on GeForce GTX 980 SLI Mobile and GeForce GT 230M compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. 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 | medium sized |
| Bus support | no data | PCI-E 2.0 |
| Interface | no data | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| SLI options | + | no data |
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 | GDDR2, GDDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2x 8 GB | Up to 1 GB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 3500 MHz | Up to 600 (DDR2), Up to 800 (GDDR3), Up to 1066 (GDDR3) MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 16 (DDR2), 25 (DDR3) |
| 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 Connectors | no data | Dual Link DVIVGADisplayPortHDMISingle Link DVI |
| HDMI | no data | + |
| Maximum VGA resolution | no data | 2048x1536 |
| G-SYNC support | + | no data |
| Audio input for HDMI | no data | HDA |
Technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| Power management | no data | 8.0 |
API support
List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12_1 | 11.1 (10_1) |
| Shader Model | no data | 4.1 |
| OpenGL | no data | 2.1 |
| OpenCL | no data | 1.1 |
| Vulkan | no data | N/A |
| 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 980 SLI Mobile outperforms GT 230M by 6953% 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%
GTX 980 SLI Mobile outperforms GT 230M by 1919% in 3DMark Vantage Performance.
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 | 136
+13500%
| 1−2
−13500%
|
| 4K | 64 | 0−1 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 65−70
+2167%
|
3−4
−2167%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 65−70 | 0−1 |
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 65−70 | 0−1 |
| Battlefield 5 | 110−120
+11200%
|
1−2
−11200%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 100−110
+1225%
|
8−9
−1225%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 65−70
+2167%
|
3−4
−2167%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 95−100
+9700%
|
1−2
−9700%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 90−95
+9200%
|
1−2
−9200%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 110−120
+11800%
|
1−2
−11800%
|
| Hitman 3 | 120−130
+12200%
|
1−2
−12200%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 80−85
+8300%
|
1−2
−8300%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 60−65
+3000%
|
2−3
−3000%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 90−95
+1467%
|
6−7
−1467%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 70−75
+7100%
|
1−2
−7100%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 65−70 | 0−1 |
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 65−70 | 0−1 |
| Battlefield 5 | 110−120
+11200%
|
1−2
−11200%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 100−110
+1225%
|
8−9
−1225%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 65−70
+2167%
|
3−4
−2167%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 95−100
+9700%
|
1−2
−9700%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 90−95
+9200%
|
1−2
−9200%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 110−120
+11800%
|
1−2
−11800%
|
| Hitman 3 | 120−130
+12200%
|
1−2
−12200%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 80−85
+8300%
|
1−2
−8300%
|
| Metro Exodus | 70−75
+6900%
|
1−2
−6900%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 60−65
+3000%
|
2−3
−3000%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 90−95
+1467%
|
6−7
−1467%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 132
+4300%
|
3−4
−4300%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 70−75
+7100%
|
1−2
−7100%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 65−70 | 0−1 |
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 65−70 | 0−1 |
| Battlefield 5 | 110−120
+11200%
|
1−2
−11200%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 65−70
+2167%
|
3−4
−2167%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 95−100
+9700%
|
1−2
−9700%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 90−95
+9200%
|
1−2
−9200%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 110−120
+11800%
|
1−2
−11800%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 74
+2367%
|
3−4
−2367%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 70−75
+7100%
|
1−2
−7100%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 60−65
+3100%
|
2−3
−3100%
|
| Hitman 3 | 70−75
+2300%
|
3−4
−2300%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 50−55
+575%
|
8−9
−575%
|
| Metro Exodus | 40−45 | 0−1 |
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 30−35 | 0−1 |
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 55−60
+1350%
|
4−5
−1350%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 40−45 | 0−1 |
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 40−45 | 0−1 |
| Battlefield 5 | 80−85
+8000%
|
1−2
−8000%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 30−35
+3000%
|
1−2
−3000%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 70−75
+7000%
|
1−2
−7000%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 70−75
+7200%
|
1−2
−7200%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 80−85
+8100%
|
1−2
−8100%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 55−60
+5500%
|
1−2
−5500%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 35−40 | 0−1 |
4K
High Preset
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 35−40
+3400%
|
1−2
−3400%
|
| Hitman 3 | 35−40
+3800%
|
1−2
−3800%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 30−33
+329%
|
7−8
−329%
|
| Metro Exodus | 27−30 | 0−1 |
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 21−24 | 0−1 |
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 30−35 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 51 | 0−1 |
4K
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 24−27 | 0−1 |
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 24−27 | 0−1 |
| Battlefield 5 | 45−50 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 12−14 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 35−40
+1133%
|
3−4
−1133%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 40−45
+720%
|
5−6
−720%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 50−55 | 0−1 |
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 20−22 | 0−1 |
This is how GTX 980 SLI Mobile and GT 230M compete in popular games:
- GTX 980 SLI Mobile is 13500% faster than GT 230M in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Far Cry 5, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GTX 980 SLI Mobile is 7000% faster than the GT 230M.
All in all, in popular games:
- Without exception, GTX 980 SLI Mobile surpassed GT 230M in all 25 of our tests.
Advantages and disadvantages
| Performance score | 38.79 | 0.55 |
| Recency | 22 September 2015 | 15 June 2009 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 330 Watt | 23 Watt |
The GeForce GTX 980 SLI Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 230M in performance tests.
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.
