980M SLI vs 1080 Max-Q

#ad
Buy
VS

Combined performance score

GTX 1080 Max-Q
26.34
+6.8%

1080 Max-Q outperforms 980M SLI by 7% in our combined benchmark results.

General info

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

Place in performance ranking187202
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Value for money14.2718.59
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)Maxwell (2014−2018)
GPU code nameN17E-G3 Max-Qno data
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date30 May 2017 (6 years old)7 October 2014 (9 years old)
Current price$1008 $499
Value for money

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTX 980M SLI has 30% better value for money than GTX 1080 Max-Q.

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 cores25603072
Core clock speed1101 - 1290 MHz1038 MHz
Boost clock speed1278 - 1468 MHz1127 MHz
Number of transistors7,200 million2x 5200 Million
Manufacturing process technology16 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)90 - 110 Watt200 Watt
Texture fill rate234.9no data
Floating-point performance7,516 gflopsno data

Size and compatibility

Information on GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q and GeForce GTX 980M SLI 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 sizelargelarge
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16no data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data
SLI optionsno 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 typeGDDR5XGDDR5
Maximum RAM amount8 GB2x 8 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit2x 256 Bit
Memory clock speed10000 MHz5000 MHz
Memory bandwidth320.3 GB/sno data
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 ConnectorsNo outputsno data
G-SYNC support+no data

Technologies

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

Optimusno data+
VR Ready+no data

API support

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12_1
Shader Model6.4no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL1.2no data
Vulkan1.2.131+
CUDA6.1+

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 1080 Max-Q 26.34
+6.8%
GTX 980M SLI 24.66

1080 Max-Q outperforms 980M SLI by 7% in our combined 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 1080 Max-Q 39562
GTX 980M SLI 47841
+20.9%

980M SLI outperforms 1080 Max-Q by 21% in 3DMark Vantage Performance.

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 1080 Max-Q 23540
+7%
GTX 980M SLI 22006

1080 Max-Q outperforms 980M SLI by 7% 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 1080 Max-Q 18192
GTX 980M SLI 18632
+2.4%

980M SLI outperforms 1080 Max-Q by 2% 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 1080 Max-Q 114542
GTX 980M SLI 124076
+8.3%

980M SLI outperforms 1080 Max-Q by 8% in 3DMark Cloud Gate GPU.

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 1080 Max-Q 197
GTX 980M SLI 210
+6.6%

980M SLI outperforms 1080 Max-Q by 7% in Unigine Heaven 3.0.

SPECviewperf 12 - Showcase

Benchmark coverage: 2%

GTX 1080 Max-Q 97
+114%
GTX 980M SLI 45

1080 Max-Q outperforms 980M SLI by 114% in SPECviewperf 12 - Showcase.

SPECviewperf 12 - Maya

This part of SPECviewperf 12 workstation benchmark uses Autodesk Maya 13 engine to render a superhero energy plant static scene consisting of more than 700 thousand polygons, in six different modes.

Benchmark coverage: 2%

GTX 1080 Max-Q 122
+51.9%
GTX 980M SLI 81

1080 Max-Q outperforms 980M SLI by 52% in SPECviewperf 12 - Maya.

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:

900p140−150
+3.7%
135
−3.7%
Full HD101
−8.9%
110
+8.9%
1440p66
+10%
60−65
−10%
4K50
+11.1%
45−50
−11.1%

Performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
+7.5%
40−45
−7.5%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 78
+59.2%
45−50
−59.2%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 45−50
+7%
40−45
−7%
Battlefield 5 133
+66.3%
80−85
−66.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 70−75
+7.7%
65−70
−7.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
+7.5%
40−45
−7.5%
Far Cry 5 91
+40%
65−70
−40%
Far Cry New Dawn 84
+29.2%
65−70
−29.2%
Forza Horizon 4 124
+51.2%
80−85
−51.2%
Hitman 3 80−85
+8.1%
70−75
−8.1%
Horizon Zero Dawn 55−60
+5.7%
50−55
−5.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
+7.5%
40−45
−7.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 93
+72.2%
50−55
−72.2%
Watch Dogs: Legion 66
+40.4%
45−50
−40.4%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 71
+44.9%
45−50
−44.9%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 45−50
+7%
40−45
−7%
Battlefield 5 121
+51.3%
80−85
−51.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 70−75
+7.7%
65−70
−7.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
+7.5%
40−45
−7.5%
Far Cry 5 89
+36.9%
65−70
−36.9%
Far Cry New Dawn 81
+24.6%
65−70
−24.6%
Forza Horizon 4 122
+48.8%
80−85
−48.8%
Hitman 3 80−85
+8.1%
70−75
−8.1%
Horizon Zero Dawn 31
−71%
50−55
+71%
Metro Exodus 64
+56.1%
40−45
−56.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2 16
−150%
40−45
+150%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 83
+53.7%
50−55
−53.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 118
+111%
55−60
−111%
Watch Dogs: Legion 59
+25.5%
45−50
−25.5%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 54
+10.2%
45−50
−10.2%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 45−50
+7%
40−45
−7%
Battlefield 5 108
+35%
80−85
−35%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
+7.5%
40−45
−7.5%
Far Cry 5 85
+30.8%
65−70
−30.8%
Far Cry New Dawn 70
+7.7%
65−70
−7.7%
Forza Horizon 4 106
+29.3%
80−85
−29.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 64
+14.3%
55−60
−14.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 48
+2.1%
45−50
−2.1%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 40−45
+7.9%
35−40
−7.9%
Hitman 3 45−50
+9.8%
40−45
−9.8%
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40
+6.1%
30−35
−6.1%
Metro Exodus 37
+48%
24−27
−48%
Red Dead Redemption 2 20−22
+5.3%
18−20
−5.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 45
+36.4%
30−35
−36.4%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 43
+59.3%
27−30
−59.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 27−30
+12.5%
24−27
−12.5%
Battlefield 5 82
+49.1%
55−60
−49.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+6.3%
16−18
−6.3%
Far Cry 5 66
+57.1%
40−45
−57.1%
Far Cry New Dawn 67
+39.6%
45−50
−39.6%
Forza Horizon 4 84
+64.7%
50−55
−64.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+10.3%
27−30
−10.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 21−24
+10.5%
18−20
−10.5%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
+10.5%
18−20
−10.5%
Hitman 3 24−27
+8.7%
21−24
−8.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
+6.3%
16−18
−6.3%
Metro Exodus 23
+53.3%
14−16
−53.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+7.7%
12−14
−7.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27
+58.8%
16−18
−58.8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 45
+66.7%
27−30
−66.7%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 26
+62.5%
16−18
−62.5%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 14−16
+15.4%
12−14
−15.4%
Battlefield 5 45
+55.2%
27−30
−55.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Far Cry 5 34
+61.9%
21−24
−61.9%
Far Cry New Dawn 38
+58.3%
24−27
−58.3%
Forza Horizon 4 55
+57.1%
35−40
−57.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion 12−14
+9.1%
10−12
−9.1%

This is how GTX 1080 Max-Q and GTX 980M SLI compete in popular games:

900p resolution:

  • GTX 1080 Max-Q is 3.7% faster than GTX 980M SLI

1080p resolution:

  • GTX 980M SLI is 8.9% faster than GTX 1080 Max-Q

1440p resolution:

  • GTX 1080 Max-Q is 10% faster than GTX 980M SLI

4K resolution:

  • GTX 1080 Max-Q is 11.1% faster than GTX 980M SLI

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

  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the GTX 1080 Max-Q is 111% faster than the GTX 980M SLI.
  • in Red Dead Redemption 2, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the GTX 980M SLI is 150% faster than the GTX 1080 Max-Q.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GTX 1080 Max-Q is ahead in 66 tests (97%)
  • GTX 980M SLI is ahead in 2 tests (3%)

Advantages and disadvantages


Performance score 26.34 24.66
Recency 30 May 2017 7 October 2014
Chip lithography 16 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 90 Watt 200 Watt

We couldn't decide between GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q and GeForce GTX 980M SLI. The differences in performance seem too small.


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

User ratings

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q
GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M SLI
GeForce GTX 980M SLI

Similar GPU comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

User ratings: view and submit

Here you can see the user rating of the graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


4.2 33 votes

Rate NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 53 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions and comments

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