AMD Radeon HD 8730M vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M Comparison

The Verdict

The data in the database splits these two mobile GPUs into completely different performance tiers. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M is the decisive winner in the only shared benchmark recorded, the Geekbench OpenCL test, where it scores 23,832 against the AMD Radeon HD 8730M's 5,955. That is a 75% gap, meaning the GTX 980M delivers roughly four times the compute performance of the HD 8730M in this specific workload. The verdict for gamers or anyone needing serious graphics horsepower is clear: the GTX 980M is the only choice, provided the system can house its MXM Module form factor.

The AMD Radeon HD 8730M, by contrast, occupies a much more modest position. Its average benchmark score of 5,955 places it at the 34th percentile of all GPUs in the database, and its closest rivals are entry-level parts like the NVIDIA Quadro K620M at 5,957 (0% delta) and the Intel UHD Graphics 730 at 5,929 (0.4% delta). It is not a competitive gaming part by modern standards; it is a legacy, end-of-life component that was released in 2013 as part of the Solar System generation. The GTX 980M, released in late 2014, sits at the 31st percentile overall, but that percentile is skewed by its average score of 5,308, which is dragged down by its weak DirectX 9, 10, and 12 Passmark results. Its raw compute and graphics scores tell a different story.

Who should pick which? The GTX 980M is for users who need a mobile GPU that can handle demanding DirectX 12 titles, OpenCL compute, or Vulkan workloads. The HD 8730M is for legacy systems, basic display output, or very light 2D tasks. No benchmark in the database suggests the AMD part can compete with the NVIDIA part in any graphics-heavy scenario. The choice is not about preference; it is about the workload.

Where Each One Wins

The GeForce GTX 980M wins the only head-to-head benchmark recorded, the Geekbench OpenCL test, by a margin of 75%. It also holds a massive advantage in raw hardware specifications that support compute and modern graphics: its FP32 throughput is 3.462 TFLOPS versus 537.6 GFLOPS for the AMD part, and its pixel rate is 72.13 GPixel/s versus 5.600 GPixel/s. The GTX 980M also supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, while the HD 8730M only reaches DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170. For any modern API workload, the NVIDIA part is the clear winner.

The AMD Radeon HD 8730M has no recorded benchmark wins. Its strongest area, relatively speaking, is its compact footprint and low power profile, but the database does not list a TDP for either card, so that cannot be quantified. Its transistor density of 12.3M per mm² is slightly lower than the GTX 980M's 13.1M per mm², but it uses only 950 million transistors on a 77 mm² die versus 5,200 million on 398 mm². In practical terms, the HD 8730M wins only in the narrow sense of being a smaller, simpler chip that fits into older or lower-end laptops. It does not win a single performance benchmark in the database.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations and design philosophies. The AMD Radeon HD 8730M uses the GCN 1.0 architecture on a chip codenamed Mars, fabricated by TSMC on a 28 nm process. It packs 950 million transistors into a 77 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 12.3M per mm². Its compute configuration includes 384 shading units, 24 texture mapping units, and 8 raster operations pipelines. Memory is 2 GB of DDR3 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 28.80 GB/s of bandwidth. The memory clock runs at 900 MHz with 1800 Mbps effective speed. The GPU core clocks sit at 650 MHz base and 700 MHz boost. It supports PCIe 3.0 x8, DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. It is marked as end-of-life and was released in 2013, with a predecessor called London and a successor called Gem System.

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M uses the Maxwell 2.0 architecture on the GM204 chip, also fabricated by TSMC on a 28 nm process. The die is much larger at 398 mm² and contains 5,200 million transistors, for a density of 13.1M per mm². Its compute layout is far more robust: 1,536 shading units, 96 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. Memory is 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, with bandwidth of 160.4 GB/s. The memory clock runs at 1253 MHz with 5 Gbps effective speed. Core clocks are 1038 MHz base and 1127 MHz boost. The card is an MXM Module with an MXM-B (3.0) interface, and its display outputs are dependent on the portable device. It supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. It is also end-of-life, released in late 2014, with a predecessor of GeForce 800M and a successor of GeForce 10 Mobile.

The architectural gap is enormous. The GTX 980M has 4 times the shading units, 4 times the TMUs, 8 times the ROPs, 4 times the memory size, and nearly 5.6 times the memory bandwidth. Its FP32 throughput is over 6.4 times higher. The AMD part is not just older; it is a fundamentally smaller and weaker design. The GTX 980M also has a more advanced DirectX feature level (12_1 versus 11_1) and a newer Vulkan version (1.4 versus 1.2.170), which matters for modern game compatibility.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M than the AMD Radeon HD 8730M in OpenCL?

A: The GTX 980M scores 23,832 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the HD 8730M scores 5,955. That is a 75% delta in favor of the NVIDIA part.

Q: Which GPU has better DirectX 12 support?

A: The GTX 980M supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while the HD 8730M supports DirectX 12 (11_1). The NVIDIA part has a higher feature level.

Q: Is the AMD Radeon HD 8730M still competitive with modern entry-level GPUs?

A: Its average benchmark score of 5,955 puts it near the NVIDIA Quadro K620M (5,957, 0% delta) and Intel UHD Graphics 730 (5,929, 0.4% delta). It is roughly on par with those parts, but far below the GTX 980M.

Q: What memory configurations do these GPUs use?

A: The HD 8730M has 2 GB of DDR3 on a 128-bit bus with 28.80 GB/s bandwidth. The GTX 980M has 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 160.4 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Are both GPUs still in production?

A: No. Both are marked as end-of-life in the database.

Q: Which GPU has higher clock speeds?

A: The GTX 980M runs at 1038 MHz base and 1127 MHz boost, while the HD 8730M runs at 650 MHz base and 700 MHz boost. The NVIDIA part is significantly higher in both cases.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records only one head-to-head benchmark between these two GPUs: the Geekbench OpenCL test. In that test, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M scores 23,832, and the AMD Radeon HD 8730M scores 5,955. The delta is 75% in favor of the GTX 980M. This is not a close result. It represents a fundamental difference in compute capability, driven by the GTX 980M's larger shader count (1,536 versus 384), higher clocks (1038 MHz base versus 650 MHz), and much faster memory (160.4 GB/s versus 28.80 GB/s).

Beyond that single shared test, the GTX 980M has a full suite of Passmark and 3DMark results in the database. Its Passmark G3D score is 7,338, and its Passmark GPU compute score is 2,816. It also records a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 649 and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 17,703. Its DirectX 9 Passmark score is 125, DirectX 11 is 57, and DirectX 10 is 35. The DirectX 12 Passmark score is 31. These numbers show that the GTX 980M is strongest in compute and modern API workloads, while its legacy DirectX 9 and 10 scores are relatively low. The HD 8730M has no such suite of results, only the single Geekbench OpenCL score.

The biggest wins for the GTX 980M are in raw compute and memory bandwidth. Its FP32 throughput of 3.462 TFLOPS is over six times the HD 8730M's 537.6 GFLOPS. Its texture rate of 108.2 GTexel/s dwarfs the AMD part's 16.80 GTexel/s. Its pixel rate of 72.13 GPixel/s is nearly 13 times higher than 5.600 GPixel/s. Every measurable hardware metric in the database points the same direction: the GTX 980M is in a different class entirely. The HD 8730M, with its 34th percentile ranking, is best understood as a basic mobile GPU from 2013, suitable for legacy use but not for any modern graphics workload. The GTX 980M, despite its 31st percentile overall ranking (which is pulled down by low legacy DirectX scores), is the clear choice for anyone needing real graphics performance in a notebook.