GeForce GT 430 vs GTX 980M

Place in the ranking	296	974
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	0.05
Power efficiency	13.18	2.19
Architecture	Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)	Fermi (2010−2014)
GPU code name	GM204	GF108
Market segment	Laptop	Desktop
Release date	7 October 2014 (10 years ago)	11 October 2010 (14 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$79

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

no data

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	1536	96
CUDA cores per GPU	no data	96
Core clock speed	1038 MHz	700 MHz
Boost clock speed	1127 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	5,200 million	585 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	unknown	49 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature	no data	98 °C
Texture fill rate	51.84	11.20
Floating-point processing power	1.659 TFLOPS	0.2688 TFLOPS
ROPs	64	4
TMUs	96	16

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
Bus support	PCI Express 3.0	PCI-E 2.0 x 16
Interface	MXM-B (3.0)	PCIe 2.0 x16
Length	no data	145 mm
Height	no data	2.713" (6.9 cm)
Width	no data	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	None
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	8 GB	1 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	2500 MHz	800 - 900 MHz (1600 - 1800 data rate)
Memory bandwidth	160 GB/s	25.6 - 28.8 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 Connectors	No outputs	HDMIVGA (optional)Mini HDMIDual Link DVI
VGA аnalog display support	+	no data
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support	+	no data
HDMI	+	+
Maximum VGA resolution	no data	2048x1536
G-SYNC support	+	-
Audio input for HDMI	no data	Internal

Supported technologies

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

GameStream	+	-
GeForce ShadowPlay	+	-
GPU Boost	2.0	no data
GameWorks	+	-
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder	+	-
Optimus	+	-
BatteryBoost	+	-
Ansel	+	no data

API and SDK compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12 (11_0)
Shader Model	6.4	5.1
OpenGL	4.5	4.2
OpenCL	1.1	1.1
Vulkan	1.1.126	N/A
CUDA	+	+

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark 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 980M 18.27
+1126%

GT 430 1.49

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. 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.

GTX 980M 7357
+1124%

GT 430 601

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.

GTX 980M 9682
+1245%

GT 430 720

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.

GTX 980M 23790
+968%

GT 430 2227

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.

GTX 980M 66
+2100%

GT 430 3

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:

900p	173 +1136%	14−16 −1136%
Full HD	71 +1320%	5−6 −1320%
1440p	34 +1600%	2−3 −1600%
4K	28 +1300%	2−3 −1300%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	no data	15.80
1440p	no data	39.50
4K	no data	39.50

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	30−35 +386%	7−8 −386%
Cyberpunk 2077	35−40 +660%	5−6 −660%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	56 +2700%	2−3 −2700%
Counter-Strike 2	30−35 +386%	7−8 −386%
Cyberpunk 2077	35−40 +660%	5−6 −660%
Forza Horizon 4	80−85 +700%	10−11 −700%
Forza Horizon 5	50−55 +1175%	4−5 −1175%
Metro Exodus	60 +5900%	1−2 −5900%
Red Dead Redemption 2	40−45 +529%	7−8 −529%
Valorant	75−80 +1183%	6−7 −1183%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	59 +2850%	2−3 −2850%
Counter-Strike 2	30−35 +386%	7−8 −386%
Cyberpunk 2077	35−40 +660%	5−6 −660%
Dota 2	40 +1900%	2−3 −1900%
Far Cry 5	65−70 +442%	12−14 −442%
Fortnite	88 +1157%	7−8 −1157%
Forza Horizon 4	80−85 +700%	10−11 −700%
Forza Horizon 5	50−55 +1175%	4−5 −1175%
Grand Theft Auto V	60 +2900%	2−3 −2900%
Metro Exodus	40 +3900%	1−2 −3900%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	182 +1038%	16−18 −1038%
Red Dead Redemption 2	40−45 +529%	7−8 −529%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	58 +625%	8−9 −625%
Valorant	75−80 +1183%	6−7 −1183%
World of Tanks	230 +619%	30−35 −619%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	50 +2400%	2−3 −2400%
Counter-Strike 2	30−35 +386%	7−8 −386%
Cyberpunk 2077	35−40 +660%	5−6 −660%
Dota 2	65−70 +3300%	2−3 −3300%
Far Cry 5	65−70 +442%	12−14 −442%
Forza Horizon 4	80−85 +700%	10−11 −700%
Forza Horizon 5	50−55 +1175%	4−5 −1175%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	49 +206%	16−18 −206%
Valorant	75−80 +1183%	6−7 −1183%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	30−33 +1400%	2−3 −1400%
Grand Theft Auto V	30−33 +1400%	2−3 −1400%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	110−120 +1070%	10−11 −1070%
Red Dead Redemption 2	16−18	0−1
World of Tanks	130−140 +1344%	9−10 −1344%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	34 +1600%	2−3 −1600%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 +400%	3−4 −400%
Far Cry 5	50−55 +920%	5−6 −920%
Forza Horizon 4	45−50 +1533%	3−4 −1533%
Forza Horizon 5	30−33 +2900%	1−2 −2900%
Metro Exodus	38 +1167%	3−4 −1167%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	27−30 +440%	5−6 −440%
Valorant	45−50 +600%	7−8 −600%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Dota 2	41 +156%	16−18 −156%
Grand Theft Auto V	41 +173%	14−16 −173%
Metro Exodus	12	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	48 +1100%	4−5 −1100%
Red Dead Redemption 2	12−14 +1100%	1−2 −1100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	41 +173%	14−16 −173%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	17 +1600%	1−2 −1600%
Counter-Strike 2	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 +200%	2−3 −200%
Dota 2	30−35 +100%	16−18 −100%
Far Cry 5	24−27 +2400%	1−2 −2400%
Fortnite	21 +2000%	1−2 −2000%
Forza Horizon 4	27−30 +1300%	2−3 −1300%
Forza Horizon 5	14−16 +1400%	1−2 −1400%
Valorant	21−24 +2100%	1−2 −2100%

This is how GTX 980M and GT 430 compete in popular games:

GTX 980M is 1136% faster in 900p
GTX 980M is 1320% faster in 1080p
GTX 980M is 1600% faster in 1440p
GTX 980M is 1300% faster in 4K

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

in Metro Exodus, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the GTX 980M is 5900% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

GTX 980M is ahead in 45 tests (96%)
there's a draw in 2 tests (4%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	18.27	1.49
Recency	7 October 2014	11 October 2010
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	1 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	40 nm

GTX 980M has a 1126.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce GTX 980M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 430 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 980M is a notebook card while GeForce GT 430 is a desktop one.

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