Quadro M1000M vs GeForce GTX 980

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

GTX 980
2014
4 GB GDDR5, 165 Watt
28.79
+288%

GeForce GTX 980 outperforms Quadro M1000M by a whopping 288% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking179502
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation9.740.87
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2018)Maxwell (2014−2018)
GPU code nameGM204GM107
Market segmentDesktopMobile workstation
Release date19 September 2014 (9 years ago)2 October 2015 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$549 $200.89
Current price$339 (0.6x MSRP)$706 (3.5x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTX 980 has 1020% better value for money than M1000M.

Detailed specifications

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 cores2048512
CUDA cores2048no data
Core clock speed1064 MHz993 MHz
Boost clock speed1216 MHz1072 MHz
Number of transistors5,200 million1,870 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)165 Watt40 Watt
Texture fill rate144 billion/sec31.78
Floating-point performance4,981 gflops1,017 gflops

Form factor & compatibility

Information on GeForce GTX 980 and Quadro M1000M 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 supportPCI Express 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16MXM-A (3.0)
Length10.5" (26.7 cm)no data
Height4.376" (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slotno data
Recommended system power (PSU)500 Wattno data
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-pinsNone
SLI options+no data

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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount4 GB2 GB/4 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed7.0 GB/s5000 MHz
Memory bandwidth224 GB/s80 GB/s
Shared memory--

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 ConnectorsDual Link DVI-I, HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.2No outputs
Multi monitor support4 displaysno data
VGA аnalog display support+no data
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support+no data
HDMI+no data
HDCP+no data
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Display Portno data1.2
G-SYNC support+no data
Audio input for HDMIInternalno data

Supported technologies

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

GameStream+no data
GeForce ShadowPlay+no data
GPU Boost2.0no data
GameWorks+no data
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder+no data
Optimus++
BatteryBoost+no data
3D Vision Prono data+
Mosaicno data+
nView Display Managementno data+
Optimusno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12
Shader Model6.45.0
OpenGL4.54.5
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.1.126+
CUDA+5.0

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 28.79
+288%
M1000M 7.42

GeForce GTX 980 outperforms Quadro M1000M by 288% based on our aggregate 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 980 11126
+288%
M1000M 2868

GeForce GTX 980 outperforms Quadro M1000M by 288% 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 980 17605
+316%
M1000M 4230

GeForce GTX 980 outperforms Quadro M1000M by 316% 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 980 12938
+270%
M1000M 3498

GeForce GTX 980 outperforms Quadro M1000M by 270% in 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics.

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

GTX 980 85374
+265%
M1000M 23422

GeForce GTX 980 outperforms Quadro M1000M by 265% in 3DMark Cloud Gate GPU.

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 980 33572
+299%
M1000M 8410

GeForce GTX 980 outperforms Quadro M1000M by 299% in GeekBench 5 OpenCL.

GeekBench 5 Vulkan

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 Vulkan API by AMD & Khronos Group.

Benchmark coverage: 5%

GTX 980 40029
+415%
M1000M 7778

GeForce GTX 980 outperforms Quadro M1000M by 415% in GeekBench 5 Vulkan.

GeekBench 5 CUDA

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 CUDA API by NVIDIA.

Benchmark coverage: 4%

GTX 980 29546
+249%
M1000M 8471

GeForce GTX 980 outperforms Quadro M1000M by 249% in GeekBench 5 CUDA.

Unigine Heaven 3.0

This is an old DirectX 11 benchmark using Unigine, a 3D game engine by eponymous Russian company. It displays a fantasy medieval town sprawling over several flying islands. Version 3.0 was released in 2012, and in 2013 it was superseded by Heaven 4.0, which introduced several slight improvements, including a newer version of Unigine.

Benchmark coverage: 4%

GTX 980 130
+189%
M1000M 45

GeForce GTX 980 outperforms Quadro M1000M by 189% in Unigine Heaven 3.0.

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 980 96
+300%
M1000M 24

GeForce GTX 980 outperforms Quadro M1000M by 300% 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 HD94
+154%
37
−154%
1440p51
+325%
12−14
−325%
4K40
+233%
12
−233%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
+300%
12−14
−300%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 69
+360%
14−16
−360%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 50−55
+456%
9−10
−456%
Battlefield 5 86
+291%
21−24
−291%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 60−65
+300%
16−18
−300%
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
+300%
12−14
−300%
Far Cry 5 84
+265%
21−24
−265%
Far Cry New Dawn 77
+285%
20−22
−285%
Forza Horizon 4 90
+246%
24−27
−246%
Hitman 3 70−75
+318%
16−18
−318%
Horizon Zero Dawn 100−110
+288%
24−27
−288%
Metro Exodus 80−85
+305%
20−22
−305%
Red Dead Redemption 2 75−80
+257%
21−24
−257%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 90−95
+309%
21−24
−309%
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55
+350%
12−14
−350%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 58
+287%
14−16
−287%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 50−55
+456%
9−10
−456%
Battlefield 5 74
+236%
21−24
−236%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 60−65
+300%
16−18
−300%
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
+300%
12−14
−300%
Far Cry 5 65−70
+187%
21−24
−187%
Far Cry New Dawn 31
+55%
20−22
−55%
Forza Horizon 4 83
+219%
24−27
−219%
Hitman 3 70−75
+318%
16−18
−318%
Horizon Zero Dawn 100−110
+288%
24−27
−288%
Metro Exodus 80−85
+305%
20−22
−305%
Red Dead Redemption 2 75−80
+257%
21−24
−257%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 26
+18.2%
21−24
−18.2%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 85
+347%
19
−347%
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55
+350%
12−14
−350%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 35
+133%
14−16
−133%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 50−55
+456%
9−10
−456%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 60−65
+300%
16−18
−300%
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
+300%
12−14
−300%
Far Cry 5 50
+117%
21−24
−117%
Forza Horizon 4 59
+127%
24−27
−127%
Horizon Zero Dawn 100−110
+288%
24−27
−288%
Metro Exodus 80−85
+305%
20−22
−305%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 46
+318%
11
−318%
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55
+350%
12−14
−350%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 75−80
+257%
21−24
−257%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 47
+236%
14−16
−236%
Far Cry New Dawn 60−65
+473%
10−12
−473%
Hitman 3 40−45
+344%
9−10
−344%
Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
+340%
5−6
−340%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 27
+350%
6−7
−350%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−33
+1400%
2−3
−1400%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 40−45
+356%
9−10
−356%
Cyberpunk 2077 20−22
+567%
3−4
−567%
Far Cry 5 48
+300%
12−14
−300%
Forza Horizon 4 48
+269%
12−14
−269%
Horizon Zero Dawn 60−65
+275%
16−18
−275%
Metro Exodus 55−60
+588%
8−9
−588%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 65−70
+983%
6−7
−983%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
+429%
7−8
−429%
Watch Dogs: Legion 21−24
+475%
4−5
−475%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry 5 50−55
+168%
18−20
−168%
Far Cry New Dawn 30−35
+580%
5−6
−580%
Hitman 3 21−24
+475%
4−5
−475%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
+325%
8−9
−325%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 17
+467%
3−4
−467%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 29
+314%
7
−314%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14
+250%
4−5
−250%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18
+433%
3−4
−433%
Battlefield 5 32
+700%
4−5
−700%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 24−27
+500%
4−5
−500%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+700%
1−2
−700%
Forza Horizon 4 34
+325%
8−9
−325%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
+325%
8−9
−325%
Metro Exodus 27−30
+250%
8−9
−250%
Watch Dogs: Legion 12−14
+550%
2−3
−550%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
+257%
7−8
−257%

This is how GTX 980 and M1000M compete in popular games:

  • GTX 980 is 154% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 980 is 325% faster in 1440p
  • GTX 980 is 233% faster in 4K

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

  • in Assassin's Creed Valhalla, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GTX 980 is 1400% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, GTX 980 surpassed M1000M in all 72 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 28.79 7.42
Recency 19 September 2014 2 October 2015
Cost $549 $200.89
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 2 GB/4 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 165 Watt 40 Watt

The GeForce GTX 980 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro M1000M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 980 is a desktop card while Quadro M1000M is a mobile workstation one.


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

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
GeForce GTX 980
NVIDIA Quadro M1000M
Quadro M1000M

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


4.3 1301 vote

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 470 votes

Rate Quadro M1000M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

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