GeForce GTX 980 Mobile vs Quadro P6000

Place in the ranking	108	253
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	3.86	19.01
Power efficiency	11.03	7.49
Architecture	Pascal (2016−2021)	Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)
GPU code name	GP102	GM204
Market segment	Workstation	Laptop
Release date	1 October 2016 (8 years ago)	21 September 2015 (9 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$5,999	$395.82

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTX 980 Mobile has 392% better value for money than Quadro P6000.

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	3840	2048
Core clock speed	1506 MHz	1064 MHz
Boost clock speed	1645 MHz	1216 MHz
Number of transistors	11,800 million	5,200 million
Manufacturing process technology	16 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	250 Watt	100-200 Watt
Texture fill rate	394.8	136.2
Floating-point processing power	12.63 TFLOPS	4.358 TFLOPS
ROPs	96	64
TMUs	240	128

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	no data	large
Bus support	no data	PCI Express 3.0
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	MXM-B (3.0)
Length	267 mm	no data
Width	2" (5.1 cm)	no data
Supplementary power connectors	1 x 8-pin	no 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 type	384 Bit	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	24 GB	4 GB
Memory bus width	384 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	1127 MHz	7.0 GB/s
Memory bandwidth	Up to 432 GB/s	224 GB/s
Shared memory	no data	-

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	1x DVI, 4x DisplayPort	Dual Link DVI-I, HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.2
Multi monitor support	no data	4 displays
Number of simultaneous displays	4	no data
Multi-display synchronization	Quadro Sync II	no data
VGA аnalog display support	no data	+
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support	no data	+
HDMI	-	+
HDCP	-	+
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	no data	2.0
GameWorks	-	+
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder	-	+
Optimus	-	+
BatteryBoost	-	+
ECC (Error Correcting Code)	+	no data
3D Vision Pro	+	no data
Mosaic	+	no data
High-Performance Video I/O6	+	no data
nView Desktop Management	+	no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	6.4	6.4
OpenGL	4.5	4.5
OpenCL	1.2	1.2
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.1.126
CUDA	6.1	+

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 HD	170−180 +75.3%	97 −75.3%
1440p	110−120 +83.3%	60 −83.3%
4K	80−85 +77.8%	45 −77.8%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	35.29	4.08
1440p	54.54	6.60
4K	74.99	8.80

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

35−40

+0%

35−40

+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Battlefield 5	70−75 +0%	70−75 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Far Cry 5	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	130−140 +0%	130−140 +0%
Hitman 3	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%
Metro Exodus	75−80 +0%	75−80 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	70−75 +0%	70−75 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	95−100 +0%	95−100 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Battlefield 5	70−75 +0%	70−75 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Far Cry 5	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	130−140 +0%	130−140 +0%
Hitman 3	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%
Metro Exodus	75−80 +0%	75−80 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	70−75 +0%	70−75 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	124 +0%	124 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	95−100 +0%	95−100 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Far Cry 5	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	130−140 +0%	130−140 +0%
Hitman 3	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	70−75 +0%	70−75 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	44 +0%	44 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	95−100 +0%	95−100 +0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

55−60

+0%

55−60

+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Far Cry 5	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	120−130 +0%	120−130 +0%
Hitman 3	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Metro Exodus	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	120−130 +0%	120−130 +0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

35−40

+0%

35−40

+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Hitman 3	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%
Metro Exodus	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	30 +0%	30 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Far Cry 5	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	30−33 +0%	30−33 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

18−20

+0%

18−20

+0%

This is how Quadro P6000 and GTX 980 Mobile compete in popular games:

Quadro P6000 is 75% faster in 1080p
Quadro P6000 is 83% faster in 1440p
Quadro P6000 is 78% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 72 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	39.67	21.55
Recency	1 October 2016	21 September 2015
Maximum RAM amount	24 GB	4 GB
Chip lithography	16 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	250 Watt	100 Watt

Quadro P6000 has a 84.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, a 500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 75% more advanced lithography process.

GTX 980 Mobile, on the other hand, has 150% lower power consumption.

The Quadro P6000 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 980 Mobile in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro P6000 is a workstation card while GeForce GTX 980 Mobile is a notebook one.

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