GeForce GTX 980 vs Radeon Pro Vega 64

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon Pro Vega 64 with GeForce GTX 980, including specs and performance data.

Pro Vega 64
2017
16 GB HBM2, 250 Watt
33.49
+16.4%

Pro Vega 64 outperforms GTX 980 by a moderate 16% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking158193
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data10.88
Power efficiency9.3112.12
ArchitectureGCN 5.0 (2017−2020)Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)
GPU code nameVega 10GM204
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date27 June 2017 (7 years ago)19 September 2014 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$549

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 cores40962048
Core clock speed1250 MHz1064 MHz
Boost clock speed1350 MHz1216 MHz
Number of transistors12,500 million5,200 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Watt165 Watt
Texture fill rate345.6155.6
Floating-point processing power11.06 TFLOPS4.981 TFLOPS
ROPs6464
TMUs256128

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).

Bus supportno dataPCI Express 3.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length267 mm267 mm
Heightno data4.376" (11.1 cm)
WidthIGP2-slot
Recommended system power (PSU)no data500 Watt
Supplementary power connectorsNone2x 6-pin
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 typeHBM2GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount16 GB4 GB
Memory bus width2048 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed786 MHz7.0 GB/s
Memory bandwidth402.4 GB/s224 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 outputsDual Link DVI-I, HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.2
Multi monitor supportno data4 displays
VGA аnalog display supportno data+
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) supportno data+
HDMI-+
HDCP-+
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536
G-SYNC support-+
Audio input for HDMIno dataInternal

Supported technologies

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

GameStream-+
GeForce ShadowPlay-+
GPU Boostno data2.0
GameWorks-+
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder-+
Optimus-+
BatteryBoost-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.46.4
OpenGL4.64.5
OpenCL2.01.2
Vulkan1.1.1251.1.126
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.

Pro Vega 64 33.49
+16.4%
GTX 980 28.78

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.

Pro Vega 64 12920
+16.4%
GTX 980 11103

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.

Pro Vega 64 71298
+105%
GTX 980 34824

GeekBench 5 Vulkan

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 Vulkan API by AMD & Khronos Group.

Pro Vega 64 73608
+83.9%
GTX 980 40029

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 HD100−110
+9.9%
91
−9.9%
1440p55−60
+10%
50
−10%
4K45−50
+15.4%
39
−15.4%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data6.03
1440pno data10.98
4Kno data14.08

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 69
+0%
69
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Battlefield 5 86
+0%
86
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Far Cry 5 84
+0%
84
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 77
+0%
77
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 253
+0%
253
+0%
Hitman 3 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Metro Exodus 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 130
+0%
130
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 83
+0%
83
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Battlefield 5 74
+0%
74
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Far Cry 5 69
+0%
69
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 64
+0%
64
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 230
+0%
230
+0%
Hitman 3 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Metro Exodus 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 100−105
+0%
100−105
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 132
+0%
132
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 35
+0%
35
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Far Cry 5 50
+0%
50
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 59
+0%
59
+0%
Hitman 3 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 100−105
+0%
100−105
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 46
+0%
46
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 47
+0%
47
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 44
+0%
44
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 27
+0%
27
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Far Cry 5 33
+0%
33
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 147
+0%
147
+0%
Hitman 3 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Metro Exodus 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 22
+0%
22
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 24
+0%
24
+0%
Hitman 3 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Metro Exodus 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 29
+0%
29
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14
+0%
14
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Far Cry 5 16
+0%
16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 34
+0%
34
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

This is how Pro Vega 64 and GTX 980 compete in popular games:

  • Pro Vega 64 is 10% faster in 1080p
  • Pro Vega 64 is 10% faster in 1440p
  • Pro Vega 64 is 15% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 72 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 33.49 28.78
Recency 27 June 2017 19 September 2014
Maximum RAM amount 16 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 14 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 250 Watt 165 Watt

Pro Vega 64 has a 16.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

GTX 980, on the other hand, has 51.5% lower power consumption.

The Radeon Pro Vega 64 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 980 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon Pro Vega 64 is a workstation graphics card while GeForce GTX 980 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.


AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64
Radeon Pro Vega 64
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980
GeForce GTX 980

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 19 votes

Rate Radeon Pro Vega 64 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3 1425 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 980 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.