GeForce GT 650M Mac Edition vs GTX 980M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 980M and GeForce GT 650M Mac Edition, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTX 980M
2014
8 GB GDDR5
18.35
+1107%

GTX 980M outperforms GT 650M Mac Edition by a whopping 1107% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking299972
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency13.142.42
ArchitectureMaxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameGM204GK107
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date7 October 2014 (10 years ago)12 July 2012 (12 years ago)

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 cores1536384
Core clock speed1038 MHz900 MHz
Boost clock speed1127 MHzno data
Number of transistors5,200 million1,270 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)unknown45 Watt
Texture fill rate51.8428.80
Floating-point processing power1.659 TFLOPS0.6912 TFLOPS
ROPs6416
TMUs9632

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 sizelargeno data
Bus supportPCI Express 3.0no data
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)PCIe 3.0 x16
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data
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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount8 GB512 MB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed2500 MHz1254 MHz
Memory bandwidth160 GB/s80.26 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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs
VGA аnalog display support+no data
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support+no data
HDMI+-
G-SYNC support+-

Supported technologies

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

GameStream+-
GeForce ShadowPlay+-
GPU Boost2.0no 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.

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (11_0)
Shader Model6.45.1
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.11.2
Vulkan1.1.1261.1.126
CUDA+3.0

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:

900p173
+1136%
14−16
−1136%
Full HD70
+1300%
5−6
−1300%
1440p33
+1550%
2−3
−1550%
4K28
+1300%
2−3
−1300%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+1600%
2−3
−1600%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+1167%
3−4
−1167%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 56
+1300%
4−5
−1300%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+1600%
2−3
−1600%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+1167%
3−4
−1167%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
+1233%
6−7
−1233%
Forza Horizon 5 50−55
+1175%
4−5
−1175%
Metro Exodus 60
+1400%
4−5
−1400%
Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
+1367%
3−4
−1367%
Valorant 75−80
+1183%
6−7
−1183%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 59
+1375%
4−5
−1375%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+1600%
2−3
−1600%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+1167%
3−4
−1167%
Dota 2 40
+1233%
3−4
−1233%
Far Cry 5 60−65
+1180%
5−6
−1180%
Fortnite 88
+1157%
7−8
−1157%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
+1233%
6−7
−1233%
Forza Horizon 5 50−55
+1175%
4−5
−1175%
Grand Theft Auto V 60
+1400%
4−5
−1400%
Metro Exodus 40
+1233%
3−4
−1233%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 182
+1200%
14−16
−1200%
Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
+1367%
3−4
−1367%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 58
+1350%
4−5
−1350%
Valorant 75−80
+1183%
6−7
−1183%
World of Tanks 230
+1178%
18−20
−1178%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 50
+1150%
4−5
−1150%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+1600%
2−3
−1600%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+1167%
3−4
−1167%
Dota 2 65−70
+1260%
5−6
−1260%
Far Cry 5 60−65
+1180%
5−6
−1180%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
+1233%
6−7
−1233%
Forza Horizon 5 50−55
+1175%
4−5
−1175%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 49
+1125%
4−5
−1125%
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 170−180
+1114%
14−16
−1114%
Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
+1600%
1−2
−1600%
World of Tanks 130−140
+1200%
10−11
−1200%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 34
+1600%
2−3
−1600%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+1400%
1−2
−1400%
Far Cry 5 50−55
+1175%
4−5
−1175%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+1125%
4−5
−1125%
Forza Horizon 5 30−33
+1400%
2−3
−1400%
Metro Exodus 38
+1167%
3−4
−1167%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
+1250%
2−3
−1250%
Valorant 45−50
+1125%
4−5
−1125%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 8−9 0−1
Dota 2 41
+1267%
3−4
−1267%
Grand Theft Auto V 41
+1267%
3−4
−1267%
Metro Exodus 12 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 48
+1500%
3−4
−1500%
Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 41
+1267%
3−4
−1267%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 17
+1600%
1−2
−1600%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7 0−1
Dota 2 30−35
+1500%
2−3
−1500%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+1150%
2−3
−1150%
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 650M Mac Edition compete in popular games:

  • GTX 980M is 1136% faster in 900p
  • GTX 980M is 1300% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 980M is 1550% faster in 1440p
  • GTX 980M is 1300% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 18.35 1.52
Recency 7 October 2014 12 July 2012
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 512 MB

GTX 980M has a 1107.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, and a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount.

The GeForce GTX 980M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 650M Mac Edition in performance tests.


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 980M
GeForce GTX 980M
NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M Mac Edition
GeForce GT 650M Mac Edition

Other comparisons

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.


4.2 342 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.5 20 votes

Rate GeForce GT 650M Mac Edition 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.