Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
Quadro P5000 vs GeForce GTX 980 SLI Mobile
Combined performance score
GeForce GTX 980 SLI Mobile outperforms Quadro P5000 by 22% in our combined benchmark results.
General info
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
Place in performance ranking | 108 | 163 |
Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
Value for money | 76.61 | 9.91 |
Architecture | Maxwell (2014−2018) | Pascal (2016−2021) |
GPU code name | N16E-GXX SLI | GP104 |
Market segment | Laptop | Workstation |
Release date | 22 September 2015 (8 years old) | 1 October 2016 (7 years old) |
Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $2,499 |
Current price | $301 | $1270 (0.5x MSRP) |
GTX 980 SLI Mobile has 673% better value for money than Quadro P5000.
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 | 2048 |
Core clock speed | 1126 MHz | 1607 MHz |
Boost clock speed | 1228 MHz | 1733 MHz |
Number of transistors | 10400 Million | 7,200 million |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 16 nm |
Power consumption (TDP) | 330 Watt | 100 Watt |
Texture fill rate | no data | 277.3 |
Floating-point performance | no data | 8,873 gflops |
Size and compatibility
Information on GeForce GTX 980 SLI Mobile and Quadro P5000 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 |
Interface | no data | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Length | no data | 267 mm |
Width | no data | 2-slot |
Supplementary power connectors | no data | 1x 8-pin |
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 | GDDR5 |
Maximum RAM amount | 2x 8 GB | 16 GB |
Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 256 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 3500 MHz | 9016 MHz |
Memory bandwidth | no data | 192 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 Connectors | no data | 1x DVI, 4x DisplayPort |
Display Port | no data | 1.4 |
G-SYNC support | + | no data |
Technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
Optimus | no data | + |
3D Stereo | no data | + |
Mosaic | no data | + |
nView Display Management | no data | + |
Optimus | no data | + |
API support
List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
DirectX | 12_1 | 12 |
Shader Model | no data | 5.1 |
OpenGL | no data | 4.5 |
OpenCL | no data | 1.2 |
Vulkan | no data | 1.2.131 |
CUDA | + | 6.1 |
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 | 136
+43.2%
| 95
−43.2%
|
4K | 64
+56.1%
| 41
−56.1%
|
Performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
Cyberpunk 2077 | 65−70
+25.9%
|
50−55
−25.9%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 65−70
+15%
|
60−65
−15%
|
Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 65−70
+21.4%
|
55−60
−21.4%
|
Battlefield 5 | 110−120
+15.3%
|
95−100
−15.3%
|
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 100−110
+23.3%
|
85−90
−23.3%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 65−70
+25.9%
|
50−55
−25.9%
|
Far Cry 5 | 95−100
+19.5%
|
80−85
−19.5%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 90−95
+16.3%
|
80−85
−16.3%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 110−120
+16.7%
|
100−110
−16.7%
|
Hitman 3 | 120−130
+24.2%
|
95−100
−24.2%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 80−85
+21.7%
|
65−70
−21.7%
|
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 60−65
+21.6%
|
50−55
−21.6%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 90−95
+27%
|
70−75
−27%
|
Watch Dogs: Legion | 70−75
+20%
|
60−65
−20%
|
Full HD
High Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 65−70
+15%
|
60−65
−15%
|
Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 65−70
+21.4%
|
55−60
−21.4%
|
Battlefield 5 | 110−120
+15.3%
|
95−100
−15.3%
|
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 100−110
+23.3%
|
85−90
−23.3%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 65−70
+25.9%
|
50−55
−25.9%
|
Far Cry 5 | 95−100
+19.5%
|
80−85
−19.5%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 90−95
+16.3%
|
80−85
−16.3%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 110−120
+16.7%
|
100−110
−16.7%
|
Hitman 3 | 120−130
+24.2%
|
95−100
−24.2%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 80−85
+21.7%
|
65−70
−21.7%
|
Metro Exodus | 65−70
+25.5%
|
55−60
−25.5%
|
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 60−65
+21.6%
|
50−55
−21.6%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 90−95
+27%
|
70−75
−27%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 132
+34.7%
|
98
−34.7%
|
Watch Dogs: Legion | 70−75
+20%
|
60−65
−20%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 65−70
+15%
|
60−65
−15%
|
Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 65−70
+21.4%
|
55−60
−21.4%
|
Battlefield 5 | 110−120
+15.3%
|
95−100
−15.3%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 65−70
+25.9%
|
50−55
−25.9%
|
Far Cry 5 | 95−100
+19.5%
|
80−85
−19.5%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 90−95
+16.3%
|
80−85
−16.3%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 110−120
+16.7%
|
100−110
−16.7%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 74
+39.6%
|
53
−39.6%
|
Watch Dogs: Legion | 70−75
+20%
|
60−65
−20%
|
1440p
High Preset
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 60−65
+25.5%
|
50−55
−25.5%
|
Hitman 3 | 70−75
+28.6%
|
55−60
−28.6%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 50−55
+25.6%
|
40−45
−25.6%
|
Metro Exodus | 40−45
+26.5%
|
30−35
−26.5%
|
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 30−35
+24%
|
24−27
−24%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 55−60
+28.9%
|
45−50
−28.9%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 40−45
+20%
|
35−40
−20%
|
Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 40−45
+26.5%
|
30−35
−26.5%
|
Battlefield 5 | 80−85
+17.4%
|
65−70
−17.4%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 30−35
+34.8%
|
21−24
−34.8%
|
Far Cry 5 | 70−75
+24.6%
|
55−60
−24.6%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 70−75
+19.7%
|
60−65
−19.7%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 80−85
+24.2%
|
65−70
−24.2%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 55−60
+33.3%
|
40−45
−33.3%
|
Watch Dogs: Legion | 35−40
+29.6%
|
27−30
−29.6%
|
4K
High Preset
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 35−40
+29.6%
|
27−30
−29.6%
|
Hitman 3 | 35−40
+25.8%
|
30−35
−25.8%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 30−33
+36.4%
|
21−24
−36.4%
|
Metro Exodus | 27−30
+28.6%
|
21−24
−28.6%
|
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 21−24
+23.5%
|
16−18
−23.5%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 30−35
+29.2%
|
24−27
−29.2%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 51
+41.7%
|
36
−41.7%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 24−27
+23.8%
|
21−24
−23.8%
|
Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 24−27
+26.3%
|
18−20
−26.3%
|
Battlefield 5 | 45−50
+20.5%
|
35−40
−20.5%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 12−14
+44.4%
|
9−10
−44.4%
|
Far Cry 5 | 35−40
+27.6%
|
27−30
−27.6%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 40−45
+28.1%
|
30−35
−28.1%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 50−55
+22.7%
|
40−45
−22.7%
|
Watch Dogs: Legion | 20−22
+25%
|
16−18
−25%
|
This is how GTX 980 SLI Mobile and Quadro P5000 compete in popular games:
1080p resolution:
- GTX 980 SLI Mobile is 43.2% faster than Quadro P5000
4K resolution:
- GTX 980 SLI Mobile is 56.1% faster than Quadro P5000
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Cyberpunk 2077, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GTX 980 SLI Mobile is 44.4% faster than the Quadro P5000.
All in all, in popular games:
- Without exception, GTX 980 SLI Mobile surpassed Quadro P5000 in all 68 of our tests.
Advantages and disadvantages
Performance score | 38.73 | 31.83 |
Recency | 22 September 2015 | 1 October 2016 |
Chip lithography | 28 nm | 16 nm |
Power consumption (TDP) | 330 Watt | 100 Watt |
The GeForce GTX 980 SLI Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro P5000 in performance tests.
Be aware that GeForce GTX 980 SLI Mobile is a notebook card while Quadro P5000 is a workstation 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.