OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Graphics cards Methodology v3.0
Graphics cards Methodology v3.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Graphics cards Methodology v3.0: the technical score from the specifications is the base, and independent expert and video reviews (up to ±0.5 points), owner opinions (up to ±0.3) and best-of lists (up to +0.3) move it up or down.
Explore Graphics cards Methodology v3.0

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M review: 117 specs compared

Avg. price:~£130VRAM:8 GBMemory bus width:256 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):100 W

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M Review: Compare 117 technical specifications and 8 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Graphics cards category and whether it is worth buying.

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M
6.5/10

Overall score

Score
6.5/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, expert reviews, best-of lists and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 40%, Reviews score 25%, List score 25%, Sentiment score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 81% of models
Score components

40%

4.4

Technical score

25%

8.1

Reviews score

25%

?

List scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.5, the mark of a weaker model in this category

10%

8.3

Sentiment score

â–¼Worse than 81% of graphics cards
7.5

Value for money

Value for money
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 54% of models
Score components

70%

6.5

Overall score

30%

9.8

Price

â–²Better than 54%
4.4

Technical score

Technical score
4.4/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 90% of models
Score components

44%

2.2

Performance

24%

4.3

Memory

12%

8.8

Power

11%

6.3

Features

5%

7.6

Design

4%

6.8

Connectivity

â–¼Worse than 90%
8.1

Reviews score

Reviews score
8.1/ 10
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 60% of models

80%

8.0

Average grade

20%

8.4

Popularity

Grades by review (8)
3 reviews: 0 with a printed score, 3 estimated from the review. 5 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
â–²Better than 60%
?

List score

List score
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
How we count it
Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
Lists with this model (0)
Not in any best-of list yet, so this part counts as 7.5. Models in a list get 8 to 10.
Not in any best-of list yet
  • nvidia-geforce-gtx-980m
  • nvidia-geforce-gtx-980m
  • nvidia-geforce-gtx-980m
  • nvidia-geforce-gtx-980m
nvidia-geforce-gtx-980m
nvidia-geforce-gtx-980m
nvidia-geforce-gtx-980m
nvidia-geforce-gtx-980m
Where to buy
    N/A~ £130
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.

What reviewers say about the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M

Based on 3 · 6

Reviewers agree it games well for a laptop chip with decent battery life, but it still trails desktop cards.
Praised
Criticised
Pick a topic to see who said what

What owners say about the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M

Based on 224 owners sharing their experience in online comments

71%positive14%mixed15%negative

Owners praise its still-capable gaming speed and overclocking, while limited VRAM and demanding newer games are its clearest drawbacks.

What owners dislike

  • Owners say demanding games like Warzone, Cyberpunk and VR often miss high frame-rate targets at high settings, so they must drop detail.24
  • The 4GB of video memory forces owners to skip ultra textures in newer games, and some see crashes when it runs out.8
  • Under heavy load, some reference and blower-style cards reach 80 to 90°C, and their fans get loud.7
  • Some reference cards hit a power limit near 1350 MHz, and others gain only about 40 MHz of core offset.6
  • Some owners see grey or black screens and crashes in games, even at stock clocks, and some say reinstalling drivers did not fix it.5
  • Some owners get stutter, especially in Fortnite, where it is worst in the first game after an update or fresh install, then clears.4
  • Owners say patches and new drivers have cut frame rates, with one Warzone player losing 15 to 20 fps after an update.3

Points mentioned by at least 3 owners, most mentioned first.

Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of graphics card NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M

Technical score
Technical score
4.4/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 90% of models
Score components:

44%

2.2

Performance

24%

4.3

Memory

12%

8.8

Power

11%

6.3

Features

5%

7.6

Design

4%

6.8

Connectivity

4.4
Reviews score
8.1
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 54% of models
Score components:

70%

6.5

Overall score

30%

9.8

Price

7.5
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
2,805 points
Market range: <4.1k points – >30.1k points
This graphics card scores 2,805 points in 3DMark Time Spy, which is lower than 93.2% of graphics cards.
3DMark Port Royal score
0 points
Market range: <0 points – >22.4k points
This graphics card scores 0 points in 3DMark Port Royal, which is lower than 83.1% of graphics cards and equal to 16.9% of graphics cards.
PassMark (G3D) result
7,360 points
Market range: <7.7k points – >36k points
This graphics card scores 7,360 points in PassMark G3D, which is lower than 90.6% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
7,350 points
Market range: <3.1k points – >26.3k points
This graphics card scores 7,350 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is lower than 74.6% of graphics cards.
FP32 performance
3.19 TFLOPS
Market range: <3.94 TFLOPS – >56.3 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 3.19 TFLOPS FP32 performance, which is lower than that of 91% of graphics cards.
Show more
What reviewers say
VRAM
8 GB
Market range: <4 GB – >16 GB
This graphics card has 8 GB of VRAM, which is less than 56.8% of graphics cards and equal to 25.7% of graphics cards.
Memory type
GDDR5
This graphics card uses GDDR5 memory, which is older than on 85.4% of graphics cards and equal to 13.2% of graphics cards.
Memory bus width
256 bit
Market range: <128 bit – >384 bit
This graphics card uses a 256 bit memory bus, which is wider than that of 50.7% of graphics cards and equal to that of 35.5% of graphics cards.
Maximum memory bandwidth
160 GB/s
Market range: <168 GB/s – >960 GB/s
This graphics card reaches 160 GB/s memory bandwidth, which is lower than that of 90.9% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.1% of graphics cards.
Effective memory speed
5,012 MHz
Market range: <7k MHz – >28k MHz
This graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 5,012 MHz, which is slower than that of 95.9% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.1% of graphics cards.
Show more
PCI Express (PCIe) version
3
This graphics card supports PCIe 3, which is older than on 77.6% of graphics cards and equal to 20.1% of graphics cards.
PCIe lanes
x16
This graphics card uses x16 PCIe lanes, which is more than 24.1% of graphics cards and equal to 75.9% of graphics cards.
DirectX version
12.1
This graphics card supports DirectX 12.1, which is older than on 77.2% of graphics cards and equal to 4.5% of graphics cards.
Vulkan version
1.2
This graphics card supports Vulkan 1.2, which is older than on 94.9% of graphics cards and equal to 3.9% of graphics cards.
OpenGL version
4.6
This graphics card supports OpenGL 4.6, which is more advanced than on 2% of graphics cards and equal to 98% of graphics cards.
Show more
Max displays supported
4
Market range: <4 – >4
This graphics card supports up to 4 displays, which is more than 9% of graphics cards and equal to 88.2% of graphics cards.
Max digital resolution
3840x2160
This graphics card supports a maximum digital resolution of 3840x2160, which is lower than that of 97% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.9% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort outputs
1
Market range: <1 – >3
This graphics card offers 1 DisplayPort outputs, which is fewer than 88.1% of graphics cards and equal to 8.7% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort version
1.2
This graphics card supports DisplayPort 1.2, which is older than on 93.9% of graphics cards and equal to 5.1% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort link rates
8.64 Gbps
Market range: <5.4 Gbps – >80 Gbps
This graphics card supports DisplayPort link rates up to 8.64 Gbps, which is slower than on 65.1% of graphics cards and equal to 0.1% of graphics cards.
Show more
Thermal Design Power (TDP)
100 W
Market range: <86 W – >360 W
This graphics card has a TDP of 100 W, which is lower than that of 88.7% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.6% of graphics cards.
Power consumption while under peak load
122 W
Market range: <106 W – >365 W
This graphics card draws 122 W under peak load, which is lower than 85.4% of graphics cards.
Recommended PSU wattage
500 W
Market range: <450 W – >850 W
This graphics card recommends a 500 W PSU, which is lower than that of 75.2% of graphics cards and equal to that of 8.8% of graphics cards.
Board power limit
100 W
Market range: <107 W – >400 W
This graphics card has a board power limit of 100 W, which is lower than that of 90.3% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.5% of graphics cards.
PCIe power spec
100 W
Show more
What reviewers say
Size
?
Length
?
Height
?
Slot width
?
Weight
?
Show more

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M vs the average graphics card

246810TotalPerformanceMemoryFeaturesConnectivityPowerDesign
  • 64 bit wider memory bus
    This graphics card has a wider memory bus than the average graphics card (256 bit vs 192 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 192 bit.
    256 bit vs 192 bit
  • 53.5% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (100 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    100 W vs 215 W
  • 23.1% lower PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a lower PSU requirement than the average graphics card (500 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    500 W vs 650 W
  • 54.5% lower board power limit
    This graphics card has a lower board power limit than the average graphics card (100 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 220 W.
    100 W vs 220 W
  • 12.5% higher review score
    Reviews score
    8.1/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    â–² Better than 60% of models

    80%

    8.0

    Average grade

    20%

    8.4

    Popularity

    Grades by review (8)
    3 reviews: 0 with a printed score, 3 estimated from the review. 5 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    8.1 vs 7.2
  • 2 more GPUs supported
    This graphics card supports more GPUs in multi-GPU mode than the average graphics card (2 vs 0). The average graphics card supports 0 GPUs in multi-GPU mode.
    2 vs 0
  • 4x cheaper
    NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M is cheaper than the average graphics card (£130 vs £520).
    £130 vs £520
  • Supports multi-GPU linking
    This graphics card supports multi-GPU linking, the average graphics card does not.
  • 12.5% higher review score
    Reviews score
    8.1/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    â–² Better than 60% of models

    80%

    8.0

    Average grade

    20%

    8.4

    Popularity

    Grades by review (8)
    3 reviews: 0 with a printed score, 3 estimated from the review. 5 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    8.1 vs 7.2
  • 4x cheaper
    NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M is cheaper than the average graphics card (£130 vs £520).
    £130 vs £520
  • 64 bit wider memory bus
    This graphics card has a wider memory bus than the average graphics card (256 bit vs 192 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 192 bit.
    256 bit vs 192 bit
  • 2 more GPUs supported
    This graphics card supports more GPUs in multi-GPU mode than the average graphics card (2 vs 0). The average graphics card supports 0 GPUs in multi-GPU mode.
    2 vs 0
  • Supports multi-GPU linking
    This graphics card supports multi-GPU linking, the average graphics card does not.
  • 53.5% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (100 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    100 W vs 215 W
  • 23.1% lower PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a lower PSU requirement than the average graphics card (500 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    500 W vs 650 W
  • 54.5% lower board power limit
    This graphics card has a lower board power limit than the average graphics card (100 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 220 W.
    100 W vs 220 W
  • 91.7% lower idle power draw
    This graphics card has a lower idle power draw than the average graphics card (1 W vs 12 W). The average graphics card has an idle power draw of 12 W.
    1 W vs 12 W
  • 55% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,127 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    1,127 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 40 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    0 vs 40
  • 28 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (12 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    12 vs 40
  • 5.6x larger process node
    This graphics card uses a larger manufacturing process than the average graphics card (28 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a manufacturing process of 5 nm.
    28 nm vs 5 nm
  • Less advanced frame generation
    This graphics card has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (no vs multi frame generation).
  • 45.9% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,038 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    1,038 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • 4 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (8 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    8 GB vs 12 GB
  • 71.4% lower texture rate
    This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (108.2 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    108.2 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • 55% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,127 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    1,127 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 40 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    0 vs 40
  • 28 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (12 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    12 vs 40
  • 45.9% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,038 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    1,038 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • 71.4% lower texture rate
    This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (108.2 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    108.2 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • 88 fewer TMUs
    This graphics card has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (96 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    96 vs 184
  • 144 fewer AI cores
    This graphics card has fewer AI cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 144). The average graphics card has 144 AI cores.
    0 vs 144
  • 55.3% lower pixel rate
    This graphics card has a lower pixel rate than the average graphics card (72.1 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s). The average graphics card has a pixel rate of 161.3 GPixel/s.
    72.13 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s
  • 85.9% lower FP32 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP32 performance than the average graphics card (3.2 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.6 TFLOPS.
    3.19 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS
  • 9 years older
    This graphics card was released earlier than the average graphics card (2014 vs 2023).
    October 2014
    2014 vs 2023
  • 67.5% lower PassMark score
    This graphics card has a lower PassMark score than the average graphics card (7,360 points vs 22,638 points). The average graphics card has a PassMark score of 22,638 points.
    7,360 points vs 22,638 points
  • 81% lower gaming score
    This graphics card has a lower gaming score than the average graphics card (2,805 points vs 14,779 points). The average graphics card has a gaming score of 14,779 points.
    2,805 points vs 14,779 points
  • 89.2% lower FP16 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP16 performance than the average graphics card (3.2 TFLOPS vs 29.5 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP16 performance of 29.5 TFLOPS.
    3.19 TFLOPS vs 29.5 TFLOPS
  • 77.1% lower FP64 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP64 performance than the average graphics card (0.1 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP64 performance of 0.48 TFLOPS.
    0.11 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS
  • 2,816 fewer FP32 units
    This graphics card has fewer FP32 units than the average graphics card (1,536 vs 4,352). The average graphics card has 4,352 FP32 units.
    1,536 vs 4,352
  • 39.1% lower compute score
    This graphics card has a lower compute score than the average graphics card (7,350 points vs 12,70.5 points). The average graphics card has a compute score of 12,070.5 points.
    7,350 points vs 12,070.5 points
  • 4 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (8 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    8 GB vs 12 GB
  • 73.6% slower memory speed
    This graphics card has a lower effective memory speed than the average graphics card (5,012 MHz vs 19,000 MHz). The average graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 19,000 MHz.
    5,012 MHz vs 19,000 MHz
  • 64.3% lower memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (160 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    160 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • 28.4% slower VRAM clock
    This graphics card has a lower VRAM clock than the average graphics card (1,253 MHz vs 1,750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1,750 MHz.
    1,253 MHz vs 1,750 MHz
  • 91.7% smaller L2 cache
    This graphics card has fewer L2 cache than the average graphics card (2 MB vs 24 MB). The average graphics card has 24 MB L2 cache.
    2 MB vs 24 MB
  • 5.6x larger process node
    This graphics card uses a larger manufacturing process than the average graphics card (28 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a manufacturing process of 5 nm.
    28 nm vs 5 nm
  • Less advanced frame generation
    This graphics card has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (no vs multi frame generation).
  • No DLSS support
    This graphics card does not support DLSS, the average graphics card does.
  • No ray tracing
    This graphics card does not support ray tracing, the average graphics card does.
  • Older PCIe version
    This graphics card supports an older PCIe version than the average graphics card (3 vs 4).
    3 vs 4
  • No AI upscalers
    This graphics card does not support AI upscalers, the average graphics card does.
  • No XeSS support
    This graphics card does not support XeSS, the average graphics card does.
  • No mesh shaders
    This graphics card does not support mesh shaders, the average graphics card does.
  • Older Vulkan version
    This graphics card supports an older Vulkan version than the average graphics card (1.2 vs 1.4).
    1.2 vs 1.4
  • No DirectStorage support
    This graphics card does not support DirectStorage, the average graphics card does.
  • No Resizable BAR
    This graphics card does not support Resizable BAR, while the average graphics card does. 76.4% of Graphics cards support it.
  • Older DirectX version
    This graphics card supports an older DirectX version than the average graphics card (12.1 vs 12 Ultimate).
    12.1 vs 12 Ultimate
  • No sampler feedback
    This graphics card does not support sampler feedback, the average graphics card does.
  • 77.3% fewer transistors
    This graphics card has fewer transistors than the average graphics card (5,200 million vs 22,900 million). The average graphics card has 22,900 million transistors.
    5,200 million vs 22,900 million
  • 35.4% larger GPU die
    This graphics card has a higher GPU die size than the average graphics card (398 mm² vs 294 mm²). The average graphics card has a GPU die size of 294 mm².
    398 mm² vs 294 mm²
  • Older shader model
    This graphics card supports an older shader model than the average graphics card (6.7 vs 6.8).
    6.7 vs 6.8
  • 2 fewer DisplayPort outputs
    This graphics card has fewer DisplayPort outputs than the average graphics card (1 vs 3). The average graphics card has 3 DisplayPort outputs.
    1 vs 3
  • Older HDMI version
    This graphics card supports an older HDMI version than the average graphics card (2 vs 2.1a).
    2.0 vs 2.1a
  • No AV1 encoding
    This graphics card does not support AV1 encoding, the average graphics card does.
  • No AV1 decoding
    This graphics card does not support AV1 decoding, the average graphics card does.
  • No DSC support
    This graphics card does not support DSC, the average graphics card does.
  • Older DisplayPort version
    This graphics card supports an older DisplayPort version than the average graphics card (1.2 vs 1.4a).
    1.2 vs 1.4a
  • More basic codec support
    This graphics card encodes more basic formats than the average graphics card (H.264/H.265 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9).
    H.264/H.265 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9
  • Older HDCP version
    This graphics card supports an older HDCP version than the average graphics card (1.4 vs 2.3).
    1.4 vs 2.3
  • Lower display resolution
    This graphics card supports a lower maximum digital resolution than the average graphics card (3840x2160 vs 7680x4320). The average graphics card supports a maximum digital resolution of 7680x4320.
    3840x2160 vs 7680x4320
  • Older NVDEC generation
    This graphics card has a lower NVDEC generation than the average graphics card (1 vs 6). The average graphics card offers NVDEC generation 6.
    1 vs 6
  • No dual BIOS
    This graphics card does not include dual BIOS, the average graphics card does.
  • No fan stop
    This graphics card does not support fan stop, the average graphics card does.
  • 31 dB noisier at idle
    This graphics card has a higher idle noise level than the average graphics card (31 dB vs 0 dB). The average graphics card has an idle noise level of 0 dB.
    31 dB vs 0 dB
  • 8 °C higher load temperature
    This graphics card has a higher load temperature than the average graphics card (75 °C vs 67 °C). The average graphics card has a load temperature of 67 °C.
    75 °C vs 67 °C
  • No backplate
    This graphics card does not include a backplate, the average graphics card does.
  • No RGB lighting
    This graphics card does not include RGB lighting, the average graphics card does.

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

9.0
Andrew Tran
≈ estimated
28/10/2014
Full review · gaming, battery and speaker tests
Verdict
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M laptop is the best choice for top gaming performance in its price range, despite lacking an optional high-resolution IPS display.
5.0
Linus Tech Tips
≈ estimated
10/09/2015
Comparison · desktop GTX 980 vs mobile GTX 980M
Verdict
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M trails the desktop GTX 980 and costs more, so it only suits niche buyers.
8.0
goldfries
≈ estimated
08/03/2015
Performance test · Battlefield 4 gameplay at ultra settings
Verdict
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M is an extremely capable mobile GPU, but it needs a lower resolution for best performance.
6.0
Digital Foundry
≈ estimated
26/10/2014
Benchmark test · plugged in vs battery vs Battery Boost
Verdict
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M needs a 30 FPS cap, vsync and modest settings to game on battery, so keep the adapter plugged in.
9.0
Linus Tech Tips
≈ estimated
14/10/2014
Benchmark comparison · mobile GPU performance tests
Verdict
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M nearly closes the gap to desktop cards in raw performance.
Not graded
Not graded
Not graded
Not graded
Not graded
Hands-on video, no verdict

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

9.0
pcper.com
≈ estimated
17/10/2014
Benchmark review · Gaming laptop
Verdict
The GeForce GTX 980M is a strong laptop GPU with DSR and power-saving options, but its 5 GHz memory keeps it below the desktop GTX 980.
8.0
cnet.com
≈ estimated
07/10/2014
Hands-on test · Gaming laptop
Verdict
The GeForce GTX 980M nearly doubles last-generation laptop frame rates at 1080p, but at 4K it drops to 14.6 fps in Metro: Last Light.
9.5
goldfries.com
≈ estimated
08/03/2015
Laptop benchmarks · Full HD gaming
Verdict
The GeForce GTX 980M sits between the desktop GTX 960 and GTX 970 at 1080p, so it suits Full HD gaming on a laptop.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M

  • Capable of stable 60+ FPS in most titles released before 2018 at 1080p high settings
  • High power efficiency and low heat output compared to its desktop equivalent
  • Supports modern features for its era, including NVIDIA BatteryBoost and Optimus for improved battery life
  • Solid legacy performance in eSports titles like Overwatch and Minecraft with shaders
  • Effective at 1080p gaming with scores well above smooth gaming thresholds in benchmarks like 3DMark Time Spy

What customers don't like about NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M

  • 4GB VRAM limitation significantly bottlenecks modern AAA games that require 6GB or more
  • Lacks hardware support for modern technologies like Ray Tracing, DLSS, and AV1 decoding
  • Struggles to maintain playable frame rates at 1440p or 4K resolutions in newer titles
  • Significant performance drop (up to 40%) when running on battery power due to downclocking
  • Architecture is increasingly mismatched with modern APIs, lacking full DirectX 12 Ultimate support

Verdict

The Nvidia GeForce GTX 980M is a high-end mobile graphics card launched in late 2014, based on the 28nm Maxwell GM204 architecture. It features 1,536 CUDA cores, a base clock speed of 1038 MHz (boosting to 1127 MHz), and is typically equipped with up to 8GB of GDDR5 VRAM on a 256-bit memory interface, delivering a bandwidth of approximately 160 GB/s. Its primary strengths include significantly improved power efficiency over previous generations and a performance profile that closely rivals mid-to-high-end desktop counterparts of its era, such as the GTX 970. However, its high power consumption (rated with a TDP of approximately 100W–125W) limits its use to larger, more robust gaming laptops, and its performance drops noticeably when running on battery power.

Compare NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M with other products in the Graphics cards category

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found