ATI Radeon 9800 PRO vs GeForce GTX 980MX

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot rated1417
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data0.22
ArchitectureMaxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)Rage 8 (2002−2007)
GPU code nameGM204R350
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date1 June 2016 (8 years ago)1 March 2003 (21 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$399

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

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 cores1664no data
Core clock speed1050 MHz380 MHz
Boost clock speed1178 MHzno data
Number of transistors5,200 million117 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm150 nm
Power consumption (TDP)148 Watt47 Watt
Texture fill rate122.53.040
Floating-point processing power3.92 TFLOPSno data
ROPs648
TMUs1048

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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16AGP 8x
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x Molex

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 typeGDDR5DDR
Maximum RAM amount8 GB128 MB
Memory bus width256 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1500 MHz340 MHz
Memory bandwidth192.0 GB/s21.76 GB/s

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 outputs1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)9.0 (9_0)
Shader Model6.4no data
OpenGL4.62.0
OpenCL1.2N/A
Vulkan1.1.126N/A
CUDA5.2-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 1 June 2016 1 March 2003
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 128 MB
Chip lithography 28 nm 150 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 148 Watt 47 Watt

GTX 980MX has an age advantage of 13 years, a 6300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 435.7% more advanced lithography process.

ATI 9800 PRO, on the other hand, has 214.9% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between GeForce GTX 980MX and Radeon 9800 PRO. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 980MX is a notebook card while Radeon 9800 PRO is a desktop 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 980MX
GeForce GTX 980MX
ATI Radeon 9800 PRO
Radeon 9800 PRO

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 26 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 59 votes

Rate Radeon 9800 PRO 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.