Gtx 980 benchmark

Gtx 980 benchmark DEFAULT

GeForce GTX 980 Ti Revisited: How does it fare against the GTX 1070 and RTX 2060?

Today we’re revisiting an old friend, the GeForce GTX 980 Ti and we’re doing so with a 36 game benchmark covering the 1080p and 1440p resolutions. We're particularly interested to see how it performs against more modern GPUs like the GTX 1070 and the GeForce RTX 2060. So in a way we suppose you could call this more of a GTX 980 Ti vs. GTX 1070 vs. RTX 2060 test.

About a year ago we reviewed the RTX 2060 for the first time. We happened to miss the official launch because Nvidia "lost" our sample in the mail but that meant we didn’t have to rush our tests and we ended up with the full hog and provided a massive 36 game test.

Looking back at that data, we found that the RTX 2060 was able to beat the GTX 1070 Ti by a slim margin, making it 13% faster than the vanilla GTX 1070. We didn’t include older GPUs at the time like the GTX 980 Ti, so the Maxwell-based flagship was absent from that feature. It will be interesting to see if those margins have changed, while also taking a look at how much faster the RTX 2060 is when compared to the GTX 980 Ti.

The GTX 980 Ti was released back in mid-2015 for $650 and the RTX 2060 in early 2019 for $350. That makes the modern Turing GPU three and a half years newer and almost 50% cheaper. The 980 Ti was a beast of a GPU, it shared the same 601mm2 die with the Titan X and although not all SM units were enabled, it still packed an impressive 2816 CUDA cores, 6GB of GDDR5 memory on a 384-bit wide memory bus, and enjoyed a memory bandwidth of 336.5 GB/s.

A year later the GTX 1070 arrived and although it packed just 1920 CUDA cores -- 32% fewer than the 980 Ti -- thanks to a ~60% increase in clock speed, performance ended up being very similar and this was largely due to Nvidia moving from TSMC’s 28nm process to what at the time was their latest 16nm manufacturing.

The jump to the 12nm process with the RTX 2060 was less extreme, but here we got an entirely new architecture. Notably, the RTX 2060 die is 42% larger than the GTX 1070 and although the core count has only increased by a little over 10%, the cores are much wider and support technologies such as real-time ray tracing.

Despite the massive increase in die size, Nvidia sold the RTX 2060 for a little less than the Pascal-based GTX 1070. In a way they had to, as the newer GPU had more features but was just marginally faster. Turing is the more modern architecture, featuring better support for DX12 and Vulkan. So again, it'll be interesting to see if that margin has grown and where -- in other words, which games are favoring Turing today.

Our test setup consists of the MSI GTX 980 Ti Gaming (graphics card names were a little simpler back then) pitted against the MSI RTX 2060 Gaming Z and GTX 1070 Gaming X. Powering the GPU test rig is the Intel Core i9-9900K overclocked to 5 GHz with 16GB of DDR4-3400 memory. As usual, rather than having 36 individual graphs, we’ll look at about a dozen of the more interesting games and then jump into the performance breakdown graphs. For the discussion, we’ll be focusing on the 1440p results...

Benchmarks

Doom Eternal is an interesting game to start with as it makes heavy use of async compute and this is a technology neither the Maxwell or Pascal architectures were able to utilize at the hardware level.

At 1440p the key advantage the GTX 1070 has over the 980 Ti is the 8GB VRAM buffer, that and what is likely better driver optimization. The end result means the 980 Ti was almost 20% slower. However it’s the RTX 2060 and it’s more modern architecture that really excels in this title, reaching almost 100 fps on average and that meant the 980 Ti was 31% slower.

It’s also worth noting that the 2060 makes out even better at 1080p as the 980 Ti is also limited to a 6GB memory buffer. Whereas it was 18% faster than the GTX 1070 at 1440p, it’s a whopping 36% faster at 1080p as the memory constraints are less of an issue at this lower resolution.

Moving to Resident Evil 3 we find a situation where the GTX 1070 is no faster than the GTX 980 Ti. If anything, it’s a little slower. This was also the case with Resident Evil 2 -- both games use the same engine and look very similar.

With 68 fps on average at 1440p, the 980 Ti fairs very well in this title. The RTX 2060 was faster, but this time by just a 13% margin, so while that is certainly progress, it’s not a ton of it.

Where we do see a significant step forward for the Turing based GPU is in Rainbow Six Siege. Here the RTX 2060 was a whopping 35% faster than the GTX 980 Ti and almost 40% faster than the GTX 1070.

Rainbow Six Siege is a compute-heavy title and previously this meant AMD’s 5th gen GCN products walked all over Nvidia’s Pascal GPUs, such as the GTX 1070. However the upgraded Turing cores tackled that weakness and now it’s Nvidia who enjoys an advantage in this title, even when compared to Radeon Navi GPUs.

The leap forward seen here is incredible, though it has to be said, with 79 fps on average the GTX 980 Ti still delivered impressive performance at 1440p.

The 980 Ti also performs very well in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare, spitting out over 60 fps at all times during our test, for an average of 81 fps. It was also just 7% slower than the GTX 1070, though it did trail the much newer RTX 2060 by a 24% margin.

The RTX 2060 does perform well in this title, even at 1440p and a 23% performance uplift over the GTX 1070 is certainly nothing to sneeze at.

This game also supports ray tracing and is therefore heavily optimized for Turing. We've witnessed Pascal GPUs such as the GTX 1060 performing quite poorly relative to competitors, in this case the RX 580. So while we're sure Turing improvements help here, we’d wager that driver optimization is playing its role as well.

The GTX 980 Ti performed well in F1 2019 using the new DX12 mode, here it was just 11% slower than the GTX 1070, but more importantly was able to provide smooth playable performance at 1440p with 76 fps on average. The RTX 2060 was 32% faster and 18% faster than the GTX 1070, so a reasonable performance uplift in this latest F1 title.

Fortnite also supports DX12 now and using this API we see comparable performance between the GTX 980 Ti and GTX 1070 at 1440p using the maximum quality preset. For competitive-type quality settings either will work just fine.

The RTX 2060 does offer a 23% performance boost and perhaps not the kind of gain you’d expect to see in this title.

Another popular battle royale game where the GTX 1070 and 980 Ti are evenly matched. Both GPUs average just over 70 fps. The RTX 2060 was about 20% faster at 1440p, which is a strong performance lead and certainly not a bad generation-on-generation performance uplift.

Shadow of the Tomb Raider remains a visually impressive game even when it's been 18 months since it launched. As you can see it’s a demanding one, even at 1440p. Here the 980 Ti failed to achieve a 60 fps average, as did the GTX 1070, both rendering just over 50 fps. This made the 23% boost offered by the RTX 2060 quite noticeable.

World War Z is yet another title where the GTX 1070 and 980 Ti are very evenly matched and it’s another title where both easily push above 60 fps at 1440p using the maximum in game quality settings. The RTX 2060 was around 18% faster so a reasonable performance uplift there, but it has to be said the 980 Ti hardly looks outdated.

The Gears 5 results are interesting, the GTX 1070 is clearly faster than the 980 Ti at 1080p, offering a 12% performance upgrade. However at 1440p the results come together and here the 1070 is just 6% faster, verging on a margin of error-type difference. The RTX 2060 is just 13% faster than the GTX 1070, though we see a similar margin between the two at both tested resolutions.

Ghost Recon Breakpoint has recently been updated to support Vulkan and this has led to big performance gains for modern GeForce GPUs -- gains of up to 20%.

It seems clear that Nvidia has not optimized for the 980 Ti and Maxwell as the GTX 1070 was a whopping 18% faster at 1440p. A similar result to what we saw with another new title, Doom Eternal.

Last up we have World of Tanks and as is often the case with older titles, we see very little difference in performance between the three GPUs, particularly at 1440p. We’re talking a 10% or lower margin between the slowest and fastest GPU. This can be attributed to better driver optimization for older GPUs and or the inability to take advantage of modern features supported by newer GPUs.

For the most part the GTX 980 Ti still looks to be handling itself rather well, though there are some titles such as Ghost Recon Breakpoint, which appear to lack proper driver optimization and therefore will require gamers to reduce graphics settings for smooth performance at 1440p. Since we’ve only looked at a dozen of the tested games, let’s see how these GPUs compared across all 36 games.

Performance Breakdown

At 1080p, the GTX 980 Ti was on average 5% slower than the GTX 1070. The only outlier here was The Division 2 where the 980 Ti was for 26% slower for some reason.

Removing that result changes the average by a single percent, making the 980 Ti ~4% slower. For the most part, you’re looking at little to no difference between these two GPUs, 21 of the 36 games tested saw a margin of 5% or less which we typically deem a draw.

Moving to 1440p reduces the margin to 4% and removing The Division 2 doesn’t change anything in that average. 22 of the 36 games saw a margin of 5% difference or less, which confirms these GPUs are very evenly matched.

When compared to the RTX 2060, the GTX 980 Ti was 20% slower on average at 1080p. The Division 2 along with Doom Eternal are weak titles for the Maxwell part.

The old GTX 980 Ti trails the RTX 2060 by a similar margin at 1440p. For this match up it was 19% slower on average. Certainly it's on the more demanding, newer, or more technically advanced games where the RTX 2060 gets away from the GTX 980 Ti.

The margins are much smaller in titles such as World of Tanks, War Thunder, For Honor and Resident Evil 3, for example. Whereas they’re quite considerable in titles such as Doom Eternal, The Division 2, Control, DiRT Rally 2.0, Strange Brigade, Rainbow Six Siege, Red Dead Redemption 2, Assassin’s Creed Odyssey, Call of Duty: Modern Warfare, and well… a few others, you get the point.

What We Learned

While the GTX 980 Ti is starting to show its age, the once mighty flagship GPU still has some fight in it, which is great to see. We have to admit, the initial intention of this benchmark session was to investigate how well the 980 Ti stacked up against the newer GTX 1070 in 2020, we often found ourselves more interested in the battle between the GTX 1070 and RTX 2060.

But we’ll stop ourselves from jumping right to that and talk a little more about the 980 Ti versus the GTX 1070. Last time we compared these two head to head in a large range of games the 980 Ti was actually 1% faster or basically identical and that’s still mostly true today. The games that tipped the results in the 1070’s favor include The Division 2, Ghost Recon Breakpoint and Doom Eternal.

None of those titles were tested before and in our opinion the 980 Ti probably shouldn’t be that much slower, so we suspect this is a result of Nvidia failing to optimize for older hardware.

The GTX 980 Ti is 5 years old now and we’re pretty confident that Nvidia abandons all optimizations around the 6 year old mark. This can be seen when looking at Kepler-based GPUs. We suspect we’re getting to a point where the GeForce 900 series will start to fall away in newer titles. If you happen to be second-hand shopping, keep that in mind.

Lets now shift gears to the RTX 2060...

Upon release we found it was ~13% faster than the GTX 1070. In today's test the RTX 2060 was 20% faster on average, so which games are responsible for the overall improvement in performance?

The biggest contributor is Control, a newer title that wasn't part of the previous test. Control is also an Nvidia sponsored title and a great deal of time has been invested into making sure RTX series GPUs deliver maximum performance, largely so ray tracing doesn’t result in a complete slideshow.

Interestingly, Strange Brigade performance has also been dramatically improved and this title does make use of async compute. Although not a popular title, it is often used for benchmarking, so it doesn’t surprise me that Nvidia has made an effort to optimize performance for Turing-based GPUs here.

The RTX 2060 was also 39% faster in Rainbow Six Siege, but that’s not much different to the 33% win it enjoyed using the older DX11 version. Nvidia has optimized Turing for Wolfenstein: The New Colossus, originally the 2060 was 20% faster, now with upgraded drivers and multiple game patches, it’s 33% faster. Red Dead Redemption 2 is another new game that massively favors the 2060.

Between new games that better utilize modern GPUs and Nvidia’s focus on driver optimizations for Turing, the RTX 2060 has been able to further distance itself from the GTX 1070 and consequently the GTX 980 Ti. For those of you still rocking the GTX 980 Ti, overall we’d say it’s holding up well and you’re probably reasonably satisfied with the experience, but we suspect it'll start to fall away now and upcoming generations should see it outpaced for around $200.

The GeForce GTX 1070 is still a solid buy but with Nvidia focusing its attention on Turing and future generations supporting ray tracing and DLSS, it'll be interesting to see how well Pascal ages over the next few years. No doubt, we’ll have plenty more benchmark content in the future that will monitor the situation.

Shopping Shortcuts:
  • GeForce RTX 2080 Ti on Amazon
  • GeForce RTX 2080 Super on Amazon
  • GeForce RTX 2070 Super on Amazon
  • GeForce RTX 2060 Super on Amazon
  • GeForce RTX 2060 on Amazon
  • AMD Ryzen 9 3900X on Amazon
  • AMD Ryzen 5 3600 on Amazon

482 interactions

Sours: https://www.techspot.com/review/2005-geforce-gtx-980-ti-revisited/

Result hiding is not allowed for Basic Edition results

The result is hidden and will not be shown for example on leaderboards or search.

Other results in 3DMark run

45% of results are lower than your score.

Premium gaming PC (2020)

  • AMD Ryzen 9 3950X
  • NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti (2x SLI)
  • ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC. ROG STRIX X570-E GAMING

High-end gaming PC (2020)

  • Intel Core i9-9900K Processor
  • NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080
  • ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC. ROG STRIX Z390-F GAMING

Gaming PC (2020)

  • AMD Ryzen 7 3700X
  • AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT
  • Gigabyte Technology Co., Ltd. X570 AORUS PRO

Gaming laptop (2020)

  • Intel Core i7-9750H Processor
  • NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 (Notebook)
  • ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC. GU502GV

Office laptop (2020)

  • Intel Core i7-1065G7 Processor
  • Intel Iris Pro Graphics 10th Gen Mobile
  • LENOVO LNVNB161216

This score

  • AMD Ryzen 5 3600
  • NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980
  • ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC. PRIME B450M-A
  • 64-bit Windows 10 (10.0.17763)

Percentage of results per score.

Name
Description
User
toso

Graphics Card

Graphics Card
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980
Vendor
Giga-Byte Technology Co., Ltd.
# of cards
1
SLI / CrossFire
Off
Memory
4,096 MB
Clock frequency
1,316 MHz (1,178 MHz)
Average clock frequency
N/A
Memory clock frequency
1,753 MHz (1,753 MHz)
Average memory clock frequency
N/A
Average temperature
N/A
Driver version
26.21.14.3648
Driver status
Approved

Processor

Processor
AMD Ryzen 5 3600
Clock frequency
4,092 MHz (3,600 MHz)
Physical / logical processors
1 / 12
# of cores
6
Package
AM4
Manufacturing process
7 nm
TDP
65 W

General

Operating system
64-bit Windows 10 (10.0.17763)
Motherboard
ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC. PRIME B450M-A
Memory
16,384 MB
Module 1
8,192 MB Crucial Technology DDR4 @ 2,660 MHz
Module 2
8,192 MB Crucial Technology DDR4 @ 2,660 MHz
Hard drive model
240 GB SPCC Solid State Disk
Sours: https://www.3dmark.com/spy/10707947
  1. Green eyes quotes
  2. Pokemon landscape art
  3. Oregon court records online free
  4. Kpmg federal
  5. Bracket tv stand

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti

Notebookcheck

Die Nvidia GeForce GTX 980 Ti ist eine High-End Desktop-Grafikkarte basierend auf der Maxwell-Architektur in 28 nm. Das Luxus-Modell nutzt den großen GM200-Chip mit 2.816 CUDA-Kernen (versus 2048 bei der GTX 980). Damit ist sie Mitte 2015 die schnellste Single-Chip-GPU für Desktop-PCs und wurde erst im Mai 2016 von der GTX 1080 abgelöst. Technisch ist sie mit der NVidia Titan X verwandt welche den selben GM200 Chip nutzt, jedoch mehr Grafikspeicher bietet.

Als Features werden CUDA, 3D Vision, PhysX, GeForce Experience, Surround, GameStream, GPU Boost 2.0, Adaptive Vertical Sync/ G-SYNC, SLI, DSR, MFAA und Virtual Reality Latenzverbesserungen unterstützt.

HerstellerNVIDIA
GeForce GTX 900 Serie
CodenameGM200
ArchitekturMaxwell
Pipelines2816 - unified
Kerntakt1000 - 1200 (Boost) MHz
Speichertakt7000 MHz
Speicherbandbreite256 Bit
SpeichertypGDDR5
Max. Speichergröße6144 MB
Shared Memorynein
DirectXDirectX 12_1
Transistoren8000 Millionen
Herstellungsprozess28 nm
FeaturesCUDA, 3D Vision, PhysX, GeForce Experience, Surround, GameStream, GPU Boost 2.0, Adaptive Vertical Sync, G-SYNC, SLI
Erscheinungsdatum02.06.2015
Herstellerseitehttp://www.nvidia.de/object/geforce-gtx-...

Benchmarks

3DMark - 3DMark Time Spy Score

5026 Points (27%)

+ 1 Einzelwerte im Detail- 1 Einzelwerte im Detail   + Vergleichsdiagramm einblenden- Vergleichsdiagramm ausblenden

ModellCPUGPURAMWert
Asus Strix GTX 980 Ti Desktop PC4790KGeForce GTX 980 Ti 1200 / 7010 MHz 6 GB 16 GB5026

...

AMD Radeon RX 5500M -13%

NVIDIA Quadro P3200 -13%

AMD Radeon RX 580 (Desktop) -12%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Desktop) -11%

AMD Radeon R9 Nano -9%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q -8%

AMD Radeon R9 Fury -6%

NVIDIA Quadro P5000 -4%

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Laptop GPU -1%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Super (Desktop) 1%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q 3%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Mobile 5%

AMD Radeon RX 590 (Desktop) 5%

NVIDIA RTX A2000 Laptop GPU 6%

AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT (Desktop) 7%

NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q 7%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q 11%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Mobile 14%

...

AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT 249%

3DMark - 3DMark Time Spy Graphics

5058 Points (26%)

+ 1 Einzelwerte im Detail- 1 Einzelwerte im Detail   + Vergleichsdiagramm einblenden- Vergleichsdiagramm ausblenden

ModellCPUGPURAMWert
Asus Strix GTX 980 Ti Desktop PC4790KGeForce GTX 980 Ti 1200 / 7010 MHz 6 GB 16 GB5058

...

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Desktop) -18%

AMD Radeon RX 5500M -15%

AMD Radeon R9 Nano -11%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Super (Desktop) -8%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q -7%

AMD Radeon R9 Fury -7%

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Laptop GPU -5%

AMD Radeon RX 590 (Desktop) -4%

AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT (Desktop) -3%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q 1%

NVIDIA RTX A2000 Laptop GPU 1%

NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q 1%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 (Desktop) 8%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Mobile 8%

AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 8%

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Laptop GPU 10%

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 Max-Q 11%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Mobile 12%

...

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti 277%

3DMark - 3DMark Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics

443119 Points (69%)

+ 1 Einzelwerte im Detail- 1 Einzelwerte im Detail   + Vergleichsdiagramm einblenden- Vergleichsdiagramm ausblenden

ModellCPUGPURAMWert
Asus Strix GTX 980 Ti Desktop PC4790KGeForce GTX 980 Ti 1200 / 7010 MHz 6 GB 16 GB443119

...

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Mobile -5%

NVIDIA Quadro P3200 -5%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q -5%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 -5%

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 (Desktop) -4%

NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q -3%

AMD Radeon VII -3%

AMD Radeon Pro W6800 -1%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti (Desktop) 0%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 SLI (Laptop) 0%

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Mobile 0%

NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 (Laptop) 0%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Desktop) 0%

AMD Radeon RX 5700 (Desktop) 1%

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 (Desktop) 1%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Super (Desktop) 2%

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Laptop GPU 2%

AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT (Desktop) 3%

...

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti (Desktop) 18%

3DMark - 3DMark Cloud Gate Score

29684 Points (39%)

+ 1 Einzelwerte im Detail- 1 Einzelwerte im Detail   + Vergleichsdiagramm einblenden- Vergleichsdiagramm ausblenden

ModellCPUGPURAMWert
Asus Strix GTX 980 Ti Desktop PC4790KGeForce GTX 980 Ti 1200 / 7010 MHz 6 GB 16 GB29684

...

AMD Radeon RX 5500M -6%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q -5%

AMD Radeon R9 Nano -4%

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Laptop GPU -4%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Mobile -4%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Mobile -4%

NVIDIA Quadro P5000 -2%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q -1%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti (Desktop) -1%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q 0%

AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 1%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Desktop) 1%

AMD Radeon Pro 5500M 3%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 (Desktop) 4%

AMD Radeon RX 580 (Laptop) 4%

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 Max-Q 5%

NVIDIA RTX A5000 Laptop GPU 8%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Desktop) 9%

...

AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT 142%

3DMark - 3DMark Cloud Gate Graphics

98958 Points (49%)

+ 1 Einzelwerte im Detail- 1 Einzelwerte im Detail   + Vergleichsdiagramm einblenden- Vergleichsdiagramm ausblenden

ModellCPUGPURAMWert
Asus Strix GTX 980 Ti Desktop PC4790KGeForce GTX 980 Ti 1200 / 7010 MHz 6 GB 16 GB98958

...

NVIDIA Quadro P5000 -8%

AMD Radeon RX 6700M -7%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Desktop) -7%

AMD Radeon Pro W6800 -7%

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile -6%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Mobile -5%

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q -5%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M SLI -3%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q -2%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Mobile 0%

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Laptop GPU 5%

NVIDIA Quadro P5200 7%

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 (Desktop) 8%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Desktop) 8%

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q 12%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q 13%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 (Desktop) 17%

AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT (Desktop) 17%

...

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 97%

3DMark - 3DMark Fire Strike Standard Score

14339 Points (37%)

+ 1 Einzelwerte im Detail- 1 Einzelwerte im Detail   + Vergleichsdiagramm einblenden- Vergleichsdiagramm ausblenden

ModellCPUGPURAMWert
Asus Strix GTX 980 Ti Desktop PC4790KGeForce GTX 980 Ti 1200 / 7010 MHz 6 GB 16 GB14339

...

NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q -11%

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Laptop GPU -10%

AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT (Desktop) -9%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Mobile -8%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M SLI -6%

NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 (Laptop) -5%

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 Max-Q -4%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Mobile -3%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q 0%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti

AMD Radeon RX 590 (Desktop) 1%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Desktop) 2%

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile 2%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Super (Desktop) 3%

NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 Max-Q 5%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti (Desktop) 5%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Desktop) 6%

AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 7%

AMD Radeon RX 5600M 10%

...

AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT 172%

3DMark - 3DMark Fire Strike Standard Graphics

16961 Points (34%)

+ 1 Einzelwerte im Detail- 1 Einzelwerte im Detail   + Vergleichsdiagramm einblenden- Vergleichsdiagramm ausblenden

ModellCPUGPURAMWert
Asus Strix GTX 980 Ti Desktop PC4790KGeForce GTX 980 Ti 1200 / 7010 MHz 6 GB 16 GB16961

...

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M SLI -13%

NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 (Laptop) -12%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Mobile -12%

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 Max-Q -12%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q -12%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Super (Desktop) -8%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Desktop) -6%

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile -4%

AMD Radeon RX 590 (Desktop) -1%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti

NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 Max-Q 1%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Mobile 2%

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q 3%

AMD Radeon RX 5600M 4%

AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 5%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Desktop) 5%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q 7%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti (Desktop) 9%

NVIDIA Quadro P5200 9%

...

AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT 198%

3DMark 11 - 3DM11 Performance Score

18303 Points (43%)

+ 1 Einzelwerte im Detail- 1 Einzelwerte im Detail   + Vergleichsdiagramm einblenden- Vergleichsdiagramm ausblenden

ModellCPUGPURAMWert
Asus Strix GTX 980 Ti Desktop PC4790KGeForce GTX 980 Ti 1200 / 7010 MHz 6 GB 16 GB18303

...

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M SLI -7%

AMD Radeon RX 580 (Desktop) -6%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Mobile -5%

AMD Radeon RX 570 (Desktop) -5%

NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 (Laptop) -4%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Super (Desktop) -3%

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 Max-Q -2%

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Laptop GPU -2%

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile -1%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti

AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT (Desktop) 3%

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q 4%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Desktop) 7%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Desktop) 8%

NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 Max-Q 9%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 (Desktop) 9%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti (Desktop) 10%

AMD Radeon RX 590 (Desktop) 12%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Mobile 13%

...

AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT 132%

3DMark 11 - 3DM11 Performance GPU

23057 Points (38%)

+ 1 Einzelwerte im Detail- 1 Einzelwerte im Detail   + Vergleichsdiagramm einblenden- Vergleichsdiagramm ausblenden

ModellCPUGPURAMWert
Asus Strix GTX 980 Ti Desktop PC4790KGeForce GTX 980 Ti 1200 / 7010 MHz 6 GB 16 GB23057

...

NVIDIA Quadro P5000 -13%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Mobile -13%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 (Desktop) -10%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Super (Desktop) -7%

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile -7%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Desktop) -4%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M SLI -4%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Mobile -3%

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q -2%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q 1%

AMD Radeon RX 590 (Desktop) 1%

NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 Max-Q 2%

AMD Radeon RX 5600M 5%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Desktop) 7%

NVIDIA Quadro P5200 9%

NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 (Laptop) 10%

AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 11%

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Mobile 12%

...

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti 166%

3DMark Vantage
3DM Vant. Perf. total +

3DMark Vantage - 3DM Vant. Perf. total

48631 Points (48%)

+ 1 Einzelwerte im Detail- 1 Einzelwerte im Detail   + Vergleichsdiagramm einblenden- Vergleichsdiagramm ausblenden

ModellCPUGPURAMWert
Asus Strix GTX 980 Ti Desktop PC4790KGeForce GTX 980 Ti 1200 / 7010 MHz 6 GB 16 GB48631

...

AMD Radeon RX 580 (Desktop) -9%

NVIDIA Quadro P5000 -8%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Desktop) -8%

AMD Radeon RX 570 (Desktop) -6%

NVIDIA Quadro P3200 -5%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 SLI (Laptop) -2%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M SLI -2%

AMD Radeon RX 590 (Desktop) 0%

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Max-Q 0%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Mobile 0%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Mobile 1%

NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 (Laptop) 3%

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 Max-Q 5%

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q 7%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Desktop) 7%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Desktop) 8%

NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q 9%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 (Desktop) 10%

...

AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT 98%

3DM Vant. Perf. GPU no PhysX +

3DMark Vantage - 3DM Vant. Perf. GPU no PhysX

58633 Points (54%)

+ 1 Einzelwerte im Detail- 1 Einzelwerte im Detail   + Vergleichsdiagramm einblenden- Vergleichsdiagramm ausblenden

ModellCPUGPURAMWert
Asus Strix GTX 980 Ti Desktop PC4790KGeForce GTX 980 Ti 1200 / 7010 MHz 6 GB 16 GB58633

...

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Mobile -11%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Super (Desktop) -11%

NVIDIA Quadro P5000 -10%

AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 -7%

NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 (Laptop) -6%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 (Desktop) -6%

AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT (Desktop) -2%

AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 -1%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Super (Desktop) -1%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile 0%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 SLI (Laptop) 2%

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q 3%

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 (Desktop) 4%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Desktop) 5%

NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 (Laptop) 7%

NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q 7%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Mobile 8%

NVIDIA RTX A2000 Laptop GPU 8%

...

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 77%

3DMark 06 3DMark 06 - Standard 1280x1024 +

37454 Points (70%)

+ 1 Einzelwerte im Detail- 1 Einzelwerte im Detail   + Vergleichsdiagramm einblenden- Vergleichsdiagramm ausblenden

ModellCPUGPURAMWert
3DMark 06 - Standard 1280x1024
Asus Strix GTX 980 Ti Desktop PC4790KGeForce GTX 980 Ti 1200 / 7010 MHz 6 GB 16 GB37454

...

AMD Radeon RX 480 (Desktop) -1%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 -1%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 (Desktop) -1%

NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 (Laptop) 0%

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 Max-Q 0%

AMD Radeon R9 Nano 0%

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q 0%

AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 0%

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Laptop GPU 0%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Mobile 1%

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Super (Desktop) 2%

AMD Radeon RX 5600M 2%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (Desktop) 2%

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Super Max-Q 2%

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 Mobile 2%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Desktop) 3%

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 (Desktop) 4%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Desktop) 6%

...

AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT 26%

Unigine Valley 1.0 - Unigine Valley 1.0 DX

91.1 fps (44%)

+ 1 Einzelwerte im Detail- 1 Einzelwerte im Detail   + Vergleichsdiagramm einblenden- Vergleichsdiagramm ausblenden

ModellCPUGPURAMWert
Asus Strix GTX 980 Ti Desktop PC4790KGeForce GTX 980 Ti 1200 / 7010 MHz 6 GB 16 GB91.1

...

AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 -16%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Desktop) -15%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Super (Desktop) -15%

AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 -13%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 Mobile -10%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Mobile -9%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q -7%

NVIDIA Quadro RTX 4000 (Laptop) -1%

AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT (Desktop) 0%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti

Sours: https://www.notebookcheck.com/NVIDIA-GeForce-GTX-980-Ti-Benchmarks-und-Specs.165854.0.html
GTX 980 in 2021- Test in 15 popular games

Nvidia GTX 980 tested: SLI, 4K, and single-GPU benchmarks and impressions

The Nvidia GTX 980 is here—as in, Nvidia has announced it, you'll be able to buy one soon, and it's also physically here in the PC Gamer offices. I've been playing games on the GTX 980 and benchmarking the card with the help of Maximum PC. We've put our cards together to test dual-GPU SLI performance and thrown the 980s up against a 4K monitor to see how they compare to the GTX 780 Ti, Radeon R9 290X, and other top-of-the-line graphics cards.

The big question: is the Nvidia GTX 980 worth its $550 / £429 price tag? According to our benchmarks, absolutely.

First: the basic specs for both 900 series cards compared to some older Nvidia GPUs.

Specs

GTX 680

GTX 780

GTX 780 Ti

GTX 980

GTX 970

CUDA cores

1536

2304

2880

2048

1664

Base clock

1006 MHz

863 MHz

876

1126 MHz

1050 MHz

Boost clock

1058 MHz

900 MHz

928

1216 MHz

1178 MHz

Texture units

192

128

192

128

104

Texture fill rate

128.8 billion /s

160.5 billion /s

196.2 billion /s

144 billion /s

109 billion /s

Single precision

1 teraflop

4 teraflops

5 teraflops

5 teraflops

4 teraflops

Memory config

2GB 256-bit GDDR5

3GB 384-bit GDDR5

3GB 384-bit GDDR5

4GB 256-bit GDDR5

4GB 256-bit GDDR5

Memory speed

6.0 Gbps

6.0 Gbps

7.0 Gbps

7.0 Gbps

7.0 Gbps

TDP

195W

250W

250W

195W

145W

Power connectors

2 x 6-pin

1 x 6-pin, 1x 8-pin

1 x 6-pin, 1x 8-pin

2 x 6-pin

2 x 6-pin

Outputs

DisplayPort 1.2, HDMI, 2x dual-link DVI

DisplayPort 1.2, HDMI, 2x dual-link DVI

DisplayPort 1.2, HDMI, 2x dual-link DVI

3x DisplayPort 1.2, HDMI 2.0, dual-link DVI

3x DisplayPort 1.2, HDMI 2.0, dual-link DVI

Launch price

$500

$650

$700

$550

$330

If you don't speak GPU specs, there are a few noteworthy numbers to hone in on above. The 900 series cards have notably higher clock speeds than the GTX 780, and each CUDA core is 40% more efficient, which makes up for the smaller number of cores. The new Maxwell architecture is also dramatically more power efficient than Kepler—the 980 can deliver 30 gigaflops per watt, versus just 15 gigaflops per watt for the 680 and 780. That's allowed Nvidia to bring the card's thermal design point down to 195 watts, and to once again run off two 6-pin connectors.

Some more information from Nvidia: Maxwell is built to work especially well at higher resolutions like 1600p and 4K. Memory architecture improvements and new color compression help Maxwell perform dramatically better than older cards when pushing more pixels. Nvidia's new MFAA is also lower impact than MSAA, which helps deliver playable framerates at 4K (though, at 4K pixel density, you may find you don't even care about AA at all).

That all sounds great, but do these cards perform as well in the wild as Nvidia claims? In a word: yes.

Jump over to the next page for a heap of benchmarks.

Current page: Page 1

Next PagePage 2
When he's not 50 hours into a JRPG or an opaque ASCII roguelike, Wes is probably playing the hottest games of three years ago. He oversees features, seeking out personal stories from PC gaming's niche communities. 50% pizza by volume.
Sours: https://www.pcgamer.com/nvidia-gtx-980-tested-sli-4k-and-single-gpu-benchmarks-and-impressions/

980 benchmark gtx

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 6GB
vs
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980

The good news is, with the release of the GTX 980 Ti, the GTX 980 's price is getting more discount. The GTX 980 is much more cheaper than the GTX 780 as it costs $ 549. Compare this to the GTX 780, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti, which came originally at a price of $ 649, $ 699. Meanwhile, the AMD closest equivalent card is the R9 Nano which costs $ 649.

The GTX 980 has 4 GB RAM compared to the GTX 780 's 3 GB video memory. Unfortunately, gaming performance was not quite as impressive. Even if the GTX 980 consistently delivers frame rate increases over the GTX 780, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti, the gain is not much to justify an upgrade.

Whether it is a justifiable upgrade depends on what graphics card you are upgrading from. Users with a GTX 780, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti will not see a remarkable increase in frame rates after paying more for this GTX 980. Similarly, those holding onto R9 Nano 's R9 390 graphics cards will not have a reason to jump teams yet. For 1080p Full HD, we were able to play Final Fantasy XV, Godfall, Call of Duty: Black Ops 4, GreedFall, Death Stranding at 61 fps to 63 fps and kept frame rates hovering around 62 fps.

For 1440p Quad HD, we were able to play Call of Duty Modern Warfare, Forza Horizon 4, Strange Brigade, Fallout 76, Valorant at 61 fps to 114 fps and kept frame rates hovering around 73 fps. For 2160p 4K, we were able to play Valorant at 100 fps to 100 fps and kept frame rates hovering around 100 fps.

Sours: https://www.gpucheck.com/compare/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1060-vs-nvidia-geforce-gtx-980/intel-core-i7-6700k-4-00ghz-vs-intel-core-i7-4770k-3-50ghz/
GTX 980 VS GTX 980Ti New Games Benchmarks 1080p \u0026 1440p
Source: https://gist.github.com/epixoip/d34245293ccecbfcc7c7## 8x GTX 980 Ti cudaHashcat Benchmark**Product:** [Sagitta Brutalis 980 Ti (PN S3480-GTX-980TI)](https://sagitta.systems/hardware/gpu-compute-nodes/brutalis/)**Software:** cudaHashcat 1.37, ForceWare 346.59**Accelerator:** 8x Nvidia GTX 980 Ti reference designThis is an older benchmark that I just never posted for some reason.### Benchmarks#### +200 Mhz Clock Offset (Sagitta HPC default)```cudaHashcat v1.37 starting in benchmark-mode...Device #1: GeForce GTX 980 Ti, 6143MB, 1076Mhz, 22MCUDevice #2: GeForce GTX 980 Ti, 6143MB, 1076Mhz, 22MCUDevice #3: GeForce GTX 980 Ti, 6143MB, 1076Mhz, 22MCUDevice #4: GeForce GTX 980 Ti, 6143MB, 1076Mhz, 22MCUDevice #5: GeForce GTX 980 Ti, 6143MB, 1076Mhz, 22MCUDevice #6: GeForce GTX 980 Ti, 6143MB, 1076Mhz, 22MCUDevice #7: GeForce GTX 980 Ti, 6143MB, 1076Mhz, 22MCUDevice #8: GeForce GTX 980 Ti, 6143MB, 1076Mhz, 22MCUHashtype: MD4Workload: 1024 loops, 256 accelSpeed.GPU.#1.: 32948.8 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#2.: 33386.8 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#3.: 34118.7 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#4.: 33683.0 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#5.: 33104.4 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#6.: 33850.6 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#7.: 33757.9 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#8.: 33660.1 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#*.: 268.5 GH/sHashtype: MD5Workload: 1024 loops, 256 accelSpeed.GPU.#1.: 15818.6 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#2.: 16023.0 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#3.: 16264.8 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#4.: 16067.1 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#5.: 15874.8 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#6.: 16158.1 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#7.: 16143.8 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#8.: 16113.5 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#*.: 128.5 GH/sHashtype: Half MD5Workload: 1024 loops, 256 accelSpeed.GPU.#1.: 7528.8 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#2.: 7576.7 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#3.: 7721.6 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#4.: 7634.5 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#5.: 7506.5 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#6.: 7619.1 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#7.: 7646.2 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#8.: 7622.5 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#*.: 60855.9 MH/sHashtype: SHA1Workload: 1024 loops, 256 accelSpeed.GPU.#1.: 5172.0 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#2.: 5223.1 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#3.: 5365.6 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#4.: 5352.0 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#5.: 5223.9 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#6.: 5342.9 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#7.: 5325.4 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#8.: 5317.8 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#*.: 42322.5 MH/sHashtype: SHA256Workload: 1024 loops, 256 accelSpeed.GPU.#1.: 1963.4 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#2.: 1980.4 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#3.: 2031.5 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#4.: 2026.5 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#5.: 1976.5 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#6.: 2028.9 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#7.: 2020.1 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#8.: 2015.3 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#*.: 16042.5 MH/sHashtype: SHA384Workload: 256 loops, 256 accelSpeed.GPU.#1.: 699.6 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#2.: 708.4 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#3.: 719.2 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#4.: 712.0 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#5.: 701.5 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#6.: 715.1 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#7.: 714.6 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#8.: 711.7 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#*.: 5682.2 MH/sHashtype: SHA512Workload: 256 loops, 256 accelSpeed.GPU.#1.: 692.3 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#2.: 701.6 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#3.: 713.6 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#4.: 707.0 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#5.: 696.1 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#6.: 710.4 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#7.: 707.5 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#8.: 705.6 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#*.: 5634.0 MH/sHashtype: SHA-3(Keccak)Workload: 128 loops, 256 accelSpeed.GPU.#1.: 491.1 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#2.: 494.4 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#3.: 501.7 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#4.: 495.4 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#5.: 490.2 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#6.: 499.0 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#7.: 495.7 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#8.: 497.8 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#*.: 3965.4 MH/sHashtype: SipHashWorkload: 1024 loops, 256 accelSpeed.GPU.#1.: 19990.0 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#2.: 20107.6 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#3.: 20508.1 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#4.: 20239.6 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#5.: 19989.5 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#6.: 20318.9 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#7.: 20328.5 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#8.: 20324.9 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#*.: 161.8 GH/sHashtype: RipeMD160Workload: 1024 loops, 256 accelSpeed.GPU.#1.: 3473.5 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#2.: 3516.9 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#3.: 3573.7 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#4.: 3545.2 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#5.: 3486.2 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#6.: 3563.9 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#7.: 3547.7 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#8.: 3537.7 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#*.: 28245.0 MH/sHashtype: WhirlpoolWorkload: 512 loops, 32 accelSpeed.GPU.#1.: 200.5 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#2.: 204.2 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#3.: 208.4 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#4.: 208.8 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#5.: 202.9 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#6.: 206.4 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#7.: 207.4 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#8.: 206.3 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#*.: 1644.9 MH/sHashtype: GOST R 34.11-94Workload: 512 loops, 64 accelSpeed.GPU.#1.: 191.3 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#2.: 193.8 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#3.: 198.4 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#4.: 198.1 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#5.: 193.6 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#6.: 197.0 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#7.: 197.6 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#8.: 196.4 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#*.: 1566.2 MH/sHashtype: GOST R 34.11-2012 (Streebog) 256-bitWorkload: 512 loops, 16 accelSpeed.GPU.#1.: 40041.3 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#2.: 40708.7 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#3.: 41671.3 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#4.: 41639.2 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#5.: 40501.9 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#6.: 41186.3 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#7.: 41472.9 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#8.: 41265.2 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#*.: 328.5 MH/sHashtype: GOST R 34.11-2012 (Streebog) 512-bitWorkload: 512 loops, 16 accelSpeed.GPU.#1.: 39723.1 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#2.: 40341.8 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#3.: 41476.3 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#4.: 41227.8 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#5.: 40084.3 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#6.: 40911.0 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#7.: 41131.4 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#8.: 40956.0 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#*.: 325.9 MH/sHashtype: phpass, MD5(Wordpress), MD5(phpBB3), MD5(Joomla)Workload: 1024 loops, 32 accelSpeed.GPU.#1.: 4442.1 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#2.: 4506.9 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#3.: 4611.0 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#4.: 4563.3 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#5.: 4491.0 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#6.: 4569.4 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#7.: 4561.4 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#8.: 4570.1 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#*.: 36315.3 kH/sHashtype: scryptWorkload: 1 loops, 64 accelSpeed.GPU.#1.: 273.9 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#2.: 274.4 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#3.: 281.9 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#4.: 278.5 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#5.: 274.3 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#6.: 276.9 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#7.: 279.3 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#8.: 277.6 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#*.: 2216.7 kH/sHashtype: PBKDF2-HMAC-MD5Workload: 1000 loops, 8 accelSpeed.GPU.#1.: 4827.3 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#2.: 4903.7 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#3.: 4979.0 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#4.: 4938.2 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#5.: 4858.4 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#6.: 4935.0 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#7.: 4935.4 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#8.: 4964.5 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#*.: 39341.4 kH/sHashtype: PBKDF2-HMAC-SHA1Workload: 1000 loops, 8 accelSpeed.GPU.#1.: 2153.4 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#2.: 2198.1 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#3.: 2234.4 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#4.: 2222.1 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#5.: 2170.1 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#6.: 2198.6 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#7.: 2235.8 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#8.: 2231.8 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#*.: 17644.2 kH/sHashtype: PBKDF2-HMAC-SHA256Workload: 1000 loops, 8 accelSpeed.GPU.#1.: 898.1 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#2.: 910.8 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#3.: 932.7 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#4.: 930.5 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#5.: 907.4 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#6.: 921.6 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#7.: 930.6 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#8.: 923.5 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#*.: 7355.2 kH/sHashtype: PBKDF2-HMAC-SHA512Workload: 1000 loops, 8 accelSpeed.GPU.#1.: 288.2 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#2.: 286.5 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#3.: 301.8 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#4.: 298.5 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#5.: 290.4 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#6.: 293.7 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#7.: 297.0 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#8.: 296.8 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#*.: 2353.0 kH/sHashtype: SkypeWorkload: 1024 loops, 256 accelSpeed.GPU.#1.: 9216.8 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#2.: 9190.3 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#3.: 9503.4 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#4.: 9421.8 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#5.: 9155.1 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#6.: 9384.0 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#7.: 9371.3 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#8.: 9418.7 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#*.: 74661.3 MH/sHashtype: WPA/WPA2Workload: 1024 loops, 32 accelSpeed.GPU.#1.: 272.3 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#2.: 275.0 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#3.: 281.0 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#4.: 277.4 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#5.: 273.1 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#6.: 278.3 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#7.: 278.8 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#8.: 279.5 kH/sSpeed.GPU.#*.: 2215.5 kH/sHashtype: IKE-PSK MD5Workload: 512 loops, 128 accelSpeed.GPU.#1.: 1174.5 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#2.: 1189.1 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#3.: 1216.9 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#4.: 1204.9 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#5.: 1185.2 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#6.: 1207.5 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#7.: 1209.7 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#8.: 1205.3 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#*.: 9593.1 MH/sHashtype: IKE-PSK SHA1Workload: 512 loops, 128 accelSpeed.GPU.#1.: 383.4 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#2.: 388.3 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#3.: 397.9 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#4.: 398.2 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#5.: 386.0 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#6.: 393.8 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#7.: 395.2 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#8.: 394.6 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#*.: 3137.4 MH/sHashtype: NetNTLMv1-VANILLA / NetNTLMv1+ESSWorkload: 1024 loops, 256 accelSpeed.GPU.#1.: 13585.5 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#2.: 13776.3 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#3.: 14096.6 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#4.: 14068.2 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#5.: 13733.7 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#6.: 14005.7 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#7.: 13989.9 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#8.: 13955.6 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#*.: 111.2 GH/sHashtype: NetNTLMv2Workload: 1024 loops, 256 accelSpeed.GPU.#1.: 1068.4 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#2.: 1071.4 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#3.: 1107.9 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#4.: 1098.1 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#5.: 1074.0 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#6.: 1091.8 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#7.: 1101.2 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#8.: 1092.8 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#*.: 8705.7 MH/sHashtype: IPMI2 RAKP HMAC-SHA1Workload: 256 loops, 256 accelSpeed.GPU.#1.: 1110.4 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#2.: 1125.0 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#3.: 1149.6 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#4.: 1139.9 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#5.: 1122.0 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#6.: 1141.0 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#7.: 1144.3 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#8.: 1140.0 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#*.: 9072.3 MH/sHashtype: Kerberos 5 AS-REQ Pre-Auth etype 23Workload: 256 loops, 32 accelSpeed.GPU.#1.: 178.9 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#2.: 182.0 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#3.: 185.4 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#4.: 185.2 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#5.: 181.9 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#6.: 183.2 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#7.: 184.4 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#8.: 184.9 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#*.: 1466.0 MH/sHashtype: DNSSEC (NSEC3)Workload: 512 loops, 256 accelSpeed.GPU.#1.: 2270.8 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#2.: 2301.4 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#3.: 2353.6 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#4.: 2350.9 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#5.: 2294.9 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#6.: 2339.7 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#7.: 2341.4 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#8.: 2332.7 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#*.: 18585.5 MH/sHashtype: PostgreSQL Challenge-Response Authentication (MD5)Workload: 1024 loops, 256 accelSpeed.GPU.#1.: 3925.0 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#2.: 3976.8 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#3.: 4086.9 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#4.: 4068.6 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#5.: 3970.2 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#6.: 4045.9 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#7.: 4051.7 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#8.: 4042.0 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#*.: 32167.1 MH/sHashtype: MySQL Challenge-Response Authentication (SHA1)Workload: 1024 loops, 256 accelSpeed.GPU.#1.: 1529.0 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#2.: 1549.5 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#3.: 1584.4 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#4.: 1571.5 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#5.: 1545.5 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#6.: 1574.2 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#7.: 1576.5 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#8.: 1570.9 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#*.: 12501.4 MH/sHashtype: SIP digest authentication (MD5)Workload: 1024 loops, 32 accelSpeed.GPU.#1.: 1266.1 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#2.: 1280.2 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#3.: 1316.2 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#4.: 1308.0 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#5.: 1277.8 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#6.: 1299.3 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#7.: 1306.6 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#8.: 1300.2 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#*.: 10354.4 MH/sHashtype: SMF > v1.1Workload: 512 loops, 256 accelSpeed.GPU.#1.: 4147.3 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#2.: 4177.6 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#3.: 4272.2 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#4.: 4268.2 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#5.: 4169.3 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#6.: 4249.4 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#7.: 4236.5 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#8.: 4245.9 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#*.: 33766.4 MH/sHashtype: vBulletin < v3.8.5Workload: 1024 loops, 256 accelSpeed.GPU.#1.: 4405.9 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#2.: 4430.6 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#3.: 4516.8 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#4.: 4513.7 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#5.: 4427.9 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#6.: 4477.2 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#7.: 4505.0 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#8.: 4538.4 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#*.: 35815.3 MH/sHashtype: vBulletin > v3.8.5Workload: 1024 loops, 256 accelSpeed.GPU.#1.: 2049.9 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#2.: 2074.3 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#3.: 2124.5 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#4.: 2119.4 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#5.: 2059.7 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#6.: 2102.2 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#7.: 2087.3 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#8.: 2097.2 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#*.: 16714.5 MH/sHashtype: IPB2+, MyBB1.2+Workload: 1024 loops, 256 accelSpeed.GPU.#1.: 2077.2 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#2.: 2102.4 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#3.: 2145.4 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#4.: 2137.3 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#5.: 2086.3 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#6.: 2125.0 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#7.: 2116.7 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#8.: 2127.4 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#*.: 16917.8 MH/sHashtype: WBB3, Woltlab Burning Board 3Workload: 256 loops, 256 accelSpeed.GPU.#1.: 847.5 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#2.: 859.3 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#3.: 877.6 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#4.: 875.0 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#5.: 855.6 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#6.: 868.2 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#7.: 873.9 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#8.: 868.5 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#*.: 6925.4 MH/sHashtype: Joomla < 2.5.18Workload: 1024 loops, 256 accelSpeed.GPU.#1.: 15697.5 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#2.: 15903.1 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#3.: 16185.4 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#4.: 15987.5 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#5.: 15768.9 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#6.: 16050.9 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#7.: 16079.9 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#8.: 16056.8 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#*.: 127.7 GH/sHashtype: PHPSWorkload: 1024 loops, 256 accelSpeed.GPU.#1.: 4440.9 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#2.: 4464.5 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#3.: 4613.2 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#4.: 4503.2 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#5.: 4467.0 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#6.: 4520.4 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#7.: 4545.6 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#8.: 4558.3 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#*.: 36113.0 MH/sHashtype: Drupal7Workload: 1024 loops, 8 accelSpeed.GPU.#1.: 39254 H/sSpeed.GPU.#2.: 39811 H/sSpeed.GPU.#3.: 40360 H/sSpeed.GPU.#4.: 39876 H/sSpeed.GPU.#5.: 39500 H/sSpeed.GPU.#6.: 40012 H/sSpeed.GPU.#7.: 40257 H/sSpeed.GPU.#8.: 40082 H/sSpeed.GPU.#*.: 319.2 kH/sHashtype: osCommerce, xt:CommerceWorkload: 1024 loops, 256 accelSpeed.GPU.#1.: 9047.9 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#2.: 9222.4 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#3.: 9540.9 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#4.: 9342.0 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#5.: 9273.9 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#6.: 9403.8 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#7.: 9349.0 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#8.: 9403.6 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#*.: 74583.5 MH/sHashtype: PrestaShopWorkload: 1024 loops, 256 accelSpeed.GPU.#1.: 5526.3 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#2.: 5595.9 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#3.: 5719.4 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#4.: 5670.5 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#5.: 5590.1 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#6.: 5683.1 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#7.: 5656.8 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#8.: 5665.5 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#*.: 45107.6 MH/sHashtype: Django (SHA-1)Workload: 512 loops, 256 accelSpeed.GPU.#1.: 4128.9 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#2.: 4178.0 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#3.: 4274.1 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#4.: 4273.7 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#5.: 4163.7 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#6.: 4258.0 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#7.: 4259.5 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#8.: 4219.8 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#*.: 33755.5 MH/sHashtype: Django (PBKDF2-SHA256)Workload: 1024 loops, 8 accelSpeed.GPU.#1.: 44999 H/sSpeed.GPU.#2.: 45679 H/sSpeed.GPU.#3.: 46748 H/sSpeed.GPU.#4.: 46707 H/sSpeed.GPU.#5.: 45538 H/sSpeed.GPU.#6.: 46354 H/sSpeed.GPU.#7.: 46705 H/sSpeed.GPU.#8.: 46387 H/sSpeed.GPU.#*.: 369.1 kH/sHashtype: Mediawiki B typeWorkload: 1024 loops, 256 accelSpeed.GPU.#1.: 4039.9 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#2.: 4112.1 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#3.: 4186.4 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#4.: 4188.4 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#5.: 4091.1 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#6.: 4129.3 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#7.: 4167.4 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#8.: 4177.2 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#*.: 33091.8 MH/sHashtype: Redmine Project Management Web AppWorkload: 1024 loops, 256 accelSpeed.GPU.#1.: 1450.3 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#2.: 1466.4 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#3.: 1504.1 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#4.: 1489.2 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#5.: 1464.3 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#6.: 1489.0 MH/sSpeed.GPU.#7.: 1495.2 MH/s
Sours: https://github.com/siseci/hashcat-benchmark-comparison/blob/master/8x%20GTX%20980%20Ti%20cudaHashcat%20Benchmark

Now discussing:

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980

Notebookcheck

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 is a high-end desktop graphics card based on the second generation Maxwell architecture. The GM204 chip is manufactured in 28 nm at TSMC. Compared to the older GeForce GTX 780Ti, the 980 offers similar performance levels but at reduced average power consumption. The similarly named Nvidia Geforce GTX 980M for notebooks is based on the same chip, but uses less shader cores and slower clock speeds for reduced performance. Since end of 2015, the GTX 980 is also used in laptops (same chip with same clocks and branding).

The Geforce GTX 980 supports a range of unique features like CUDA, 3D Vision, PhysX, GeForce Experience, GameStream, GPU Boost 3.0, Adaptive Vertical-Sync / G-Sync, SLI, DSR, MFAA and Virtual Reality latency improvements.

ManufacturerNVIDIA
GeForce GTX 900 Series
CodenameGM204
ArchitectureMaxwell
Pipelines2048 - unified
Core Speed1126 - 1216 (Boost) MHz
Memory Speed3500 MHz
Memory Bus Width256 Bit
Memory TypeGDDR5
Max. Amount of Memory4096 MB
Shared Memoryno
DirectXDirectX 12_1
Transistor Count5200 Million
technology28 nm
FeaturesCUDA, 3D Vision, PhysX, GeForce Experience, Surround, GameStream, GPU Boost 2.0, Adaptive Vertical Sync, G-SYNC, SLI
Date of Announcement19.09.2014
Link to Manufacturer Pagehttp://www.nvidia.de/object/geforce-gtx-...

Benchmarks

Performance Rating - 3DMark 11 + Fire Strike + Time Spy

40.7 pt (44%)

...

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q -9%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Super (Desktop) -9%

AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH -9%

AMD Radeon R9 290X -9%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M SLI -7%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 880M SLI -5%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 (Laptop) -3%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 -3%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 (Desktop) -1%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti 1%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M SLI 2%

AMD Radeon R9 390X 3%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Mobile 4%

AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT (Desktop) 6%

AMD Radeon RX 570 (Desktop) 6%

AMD Radeon RX 580 (Desktop) 7%

AMD Radeon RX 480 (Desktop) 8%

AMD Radeon R9 Fury 9%

...

AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT 129%

3DMark - 3DMark Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics

323076 Points (50%)

+ 1 benchmarks and specifications- 1 benchmarks and specifications   + Show comparison chart- Hide comparison chart

...

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 Mobile -6%

AMD Radeon R9 380 -6%

AMD Radeon RX 460 (Desktop) -5%

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 Max-Q -4%

NVIDIA Quadro P620 -4%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 -4%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q -3%

AMD Radeon R9 390X -2%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Max-Q -1%

AMD Radeon R7 370 0%

NVIDIA Quadro M5000M 0%

AMD Radeon R9 290X 0%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q 1%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile 1%

NVIDIA Quadro P2000 Max-Q 1%

NVIDIA GeForce MX450 2%

NVIDIA Quadro P3000 3%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M 5%

...

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Ti (Desktop) 61%

3DMark - 3DMark Ice Storm Extreme Graphics

256207 Points (35%)

+ 1 benchmarks and specifications- 1 benchmarks and specifications   + Show comparison chart- Hide comparison chart

...

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Mobile -7%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 -6%

AMD Radeon HD 8970M Crossfire -6%

AMD Radeon RX 6800M -5%

AMD Radeon R7 370 -5%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 (Desktop) -3%

NVIDIA Quadro M5000M -2%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q -1%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M SLI 0%

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Mobile 3%

AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT (Desktop) 7%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Desktop) 8%

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 Max-Q 9%

AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH 10%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Super (Desktop) 11%

AMD Radeon RX 570 (Desktop) 12%

AMD Radeon R9 390X 16%

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 (Desktop) 19%

...

AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT 65%

3DMark - 3DMark Cloud Gate Score

min: 18386     avg: 21639     median: 21638.5 (29%)     max: 24891 Points

+ 2 benchmarks and specifications- 2 benchmarks and specifications   + Show comparison chart- Hide comparison chart

...

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M -6%

AMD Radeon RX 460 (Desktop) -6%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q -4%

AMD Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 5000) -3%

NVIDIA Quadro M2200 -3%

AMD Radeon R9 380 -2%

NVIDIA Quadro M3000M -1%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 (Desktop) -1%

AMD FirePro W7170M 0%

AMD Radeon RX 470 (Desktop) 0%

AMD Radeon Pro Vega 20 2%

AMD Radeon R9 280X 2%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q 2%

AMD Radeon R9 M290X Crossfire 3%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M SLI 3%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M SLI 3%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Mobile 3%

AMD Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000) 3%

...

AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT 231%

3DMark - 3DMark Cloud Gate Graphics

min: 84129     avg: 85374     median: 85374 (42%)     max: 86619 Points

+ 2 benchmarks and specifications- 2 benchmarks and specifications   + Show comparison chart- Hide comparison chart

...

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Desktop) -10%

NVIDIA Quadro P3200 -10%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 (Desktop) -10%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 880M SLI -10%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 (Laptop) -8%

NVIDIA Quadro RTX 5000 Max-Q -8%

AMD Radeon R9 Fury -6%

AMD Radeon R9 Nano -5%

AMD Radeon RX 580 (Desktop) -3%

AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT (Desktop) 1%

AMD Radeon RX 590 (Desktop) 2%

NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 (Laptop) 2%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti (Desktop) 3%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Super (Desktop) 5%

NVIDIA Quadro P5000 6%

AMD Radeon RX 6700M 7%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Desktop) 8%

AMD Radeon Pro W6800 8%

...

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 129%

3DMark - 3DMark Fire Strike Standard Score

min: 6453     avg: 9605     median: 10397.5 (27%)     max: 11408 Points

+ 6 benchmarks and specifications- 6 benchmarks and specifications   + Show comparison chart- Hide comparison chart

...

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Desktop) -8%

AMD Radeon RX 470 (Laptop) -7%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 880M SLI -5%

AMD Radeon RX 5300M -5%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 Max-Q -5%

AMD Radeon Pro 5500M -4%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Mobile -4%

NVIDIA T1200 Laptop GPU -4%

AMD Radeon RX 470 (Desktop) -1%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 1%

AMD Radeon RX 580 (Laptop) 2%

AMD Radeon R9 290X 2%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 Mobile 2%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti 4%

NVIDIA Quadro P4000 6%

AMD Radeon RX 480 (Desktop) 8%

AMD Radeon R9 390X 9%

NVIDIA Quadro P4000 Max-Q 9%

...

AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT 307%

3DMark - 3DMark Fire Strike Standard Graphics

min: 11349     avg: 12585     median: 12938 (26%)     max: 13510 Points

+ 6 benchmarks and specifications- 6 benchmarks and specifications   + Show comparison chart- Hide comparison chart

...

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti -6%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 880M SLI -6%

AMD Radeon RX 470 (Desktop) -6%

AMD Radeon RX 480 (Desktop) -3%

NVIDIA Quadro P3200 -3%

NVIDIA Quadro P4000 -3%

AMD Radeon RX 5500M -3%

NVIDIA Quadro P4000 Max-Q -2%

AMD Radeon R9 390X -2%

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Laptop GPU 1%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Desktop) 2%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 (Laptop) 4%

NVIDIA RTX A2000 Laptop GPU 6%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q 6%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 (Desktop) 9%

NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q 9%

AMD Radeon RX 570 (Desktop) 10%

AMD Radeon RX 580 (Desktop) 11%

...

AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT 302%

3DMark - 3DMark Ice Storm Graphics

min: 275316     avg: 318379     median: 318379 (42%)     max: 361442 Points

+ 2 benchmarks and specifications- 2 benchmarks and specifications   + Show comparison chart- Hide comparison chart

...

AMD Radeon R7 370 -6%

AMD Radeon R9 380 -5%

AMD Radeon R9 280X -5%

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Mobile -4%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760 -4%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 -4%

NVIDIA Quadro M5000M -3%

AMD Radeon HD 8970M Crossfire -3%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 880M SLI -1%

AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH 0%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 SLI (Desktop) 1%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 1%

AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT (Desktop) 2%

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 Super (Desktop) 3%

AMD Radeon R9 290X 4%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (Desktop) 4%

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 (Desktop) 5%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M SLI 5%

...

AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT 43%

3DMark 11 - 3DM11 Performance Score

min: 12348     avg: 14003     median: 14169 (33%)     max: 15325 Points

+ 4 benchmarks and specifications- 4 benchmarks and specifications   + Show comparison chart- Hide comparison chart

...

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 -6%

AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH -6%

NVIDIA Quadro T2000 (Laptop) -5%

AMD Radeon R9 290X -4%

NVIDIA Quadro P4000 Max-Q -4%

NVIDIA T1200 Laptop GPU -2%

AMD Radeon RX 470 (Desktop) -1%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (Desktop) -1%

AMD Radeon RX 5500M 0%

AMD Radeon Pro 5500M 1%

AMD Radeon R9 390X 2%

NVIDIA Quadro M5500 3%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 (Laptop) 4%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M SLI 4%

AMD Radeon R9 Nano 6%

AMD Radeon R9 Fury 6%

NVIDIA Quadro P3200 6%

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Laptop GPU 8%

...

AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT 203%

3DMark 11 - 3DM11 Performance GPU

min: 16838     avg: 17465     median: 17604.5 (29%)     max: 17811 Points

+ 4 benchmarks and specifications- 4 benchmarks and specifications   + Show comparison chart- Hide comparison chart

...

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 880M SLI -9%

NVIDIA Quadro P4000 Max-Q -9%

AMD Radeon R9 290X -7%

NVIDIA Quadro P3200 -7%

AMD Radeon RX 5500M -4%

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Laptop GPU -3%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 (Laptop) -3%

AMD Radeon R9 Nano -1%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 (Desktop) -1%

AMD Radeon R9 Fury 0%

AMD Radeon RX 470 (Desktop) 1%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q 1%

NVIDIA RTX A2000 Laptop GPU 2%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Super (Desktop) 2%

AMD Radeon RX 480 (Desktop) 3%

AMD Radeon R9 390X 3%

NVIDIA Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q 3%

AMD Radeon RX 570 (Desktop) 9%

...

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti 251%

3DMark Vantage
3DM Vant. Perf. total +

3DMark Vantage - 3DM Vant. Perf. total

37997 Points (37%)

+ 1 benchmarks and specifications- 1 benchmarks and specifications   + Show comparison chart- Hide comparison chart

...

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 Mobile -10%

AMD Radeon HD 8970M Crossfire -10%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Mobile -9%

AMD Radeon R9 390X -6%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M SLI -5%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M SLI -5%

NVIDIA Quadro P4000 -5%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 880M SLI -4%

AMD Radeon R9 290X -3%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti 2%

AMD Radeon RX 5300M 3%

NVIDIA Quadro T2000 Max-Q 3%

AMD Radeon RX 480 (Desktop) 4%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q 4%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 (Laptop) 4%

AMD Radeon R9 Fury 11%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 11%

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Laptop GPU 14%

...

AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT 154%

3DM Vant. Perf. GPU no PhysX +

3DMark Vantage - 3DM Vant. Perf. GPU no PhysX

44693 Points (41%)

+ 1 benchmarks and specifications- 1 benchmarks and specifications   + Show comparison chart- Hide comparison chart

...

AMD Radeon RX 580 (Desktop) -7%

AMD Radeon R9 290X -6%

NVIDIA Quadro P4000 -5%

AMD Radeon RX 570 (Desktop) -5%

AMD Radeon RX 480 (Desktop) -5%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 880M SLI -4%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M SLI -3%

NVIDIA T1200 Laptop GPU -2%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M SLI -1%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 (Laptop) 1%

AMD Radeon RX 590 (Desktop) 3%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti 3%

NVIDIA Quadro P3200 4%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 5%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q 5%

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Laptop GPU 6%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Max-Q 6%

AMD Radeon R9 Fury 6%

...

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 132%

Unigine Heaven 3.0 - Unigine Heaven 3.0 DX 11

min: 109.1     avg: 130     median: 129.7 (43%)     max: 150.2 fps

+ 2 benchmarks and specifications- 2 benchmarks and specifications   + Show comparison chart- Hide comparison chart

...

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M -29%

AMD Radeon R9 280X -27%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile -22%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M SLI -17%

NVIDIA Quadro T1000 (Laptop) -15%

NVIDIA Quadro M5000M -14%

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M -14%

Sours: https://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-GTX-980-Desktop.128942.0.html


316 317 318 319 320