NVIDIA GeForce 830M vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 SUPER Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded benchmark data for these two GPUs comes from entirely different test suites, which makes a direct score-for-score comparison impossible. The NVIDIA GeForce 830M has results from Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan, while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 SUPER only has a single result from 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12. There is no shared benchmark between the two in the database. This means the head-to-head comparison must be framed through the average benchmark scores and the nearest rival data provided, rather than through identical workloads.

The GeForce 830M posts an average benchmark score of 3,957 across its two recorded tests. Its nearest rivals in the database are tightly clustered around this figure. The AMD Radeon R5 M420 sits at 3,956, a delta of 0 percent, making the two statistically indistinguishable. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 745M scores 3,953, which is 0.1 percent behind the 830M. The NVIDIA Quadro K2000 scores 3,964, putting it 0.2 percent ahead of the 830M. The AMD Radeon HD 6850 X2 scores 3,977, which is 0.5 percent ahead. These deltas are all within a single percentage point, indicating that the 830M is positioned in a very narrow performance band where no rival holds a decisive edge. The 830M sits at the 24th percentile of all GPUs in the database, meaning roughly three-quarters of recorded GPUs score higher.

The GeForce RTX 5080 SUPER, by contrast, has an average benchmark score of 3,075 from its single 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 run. Its nearest rivals are also close, but the deltas are slightly larger. The NVIDIA Quadro P1000 scores 3,163, which is 2.8 percent ahead of the RTX 5080 SUPER. The Intel Arc Pro B60 scores 3,182, 3.4 percent ahead. On the other side, the NVIDIA GeForce 820A scores 2,983, 3.1 percent behind the RTX 5080 SUPER, and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 860M scores 2,967, 3.6 percent behind. The RTX 5080 SUPER lands at the 19th percentile of all GPUs, which is actually lower than the 830M's 24th percentile. This is a direct consequence of the different benchmark suites: the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test is a demanding modern workload, while the Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan tests used for the 830M are less stressful on the hardware. The percentile figures should not be read as the RTX 5080 SUPER being slower; rather, they reflect that the database's percentile ranking is benchmark-dependent.

The data shows no shared workload where both GPUs were measured. The wins are therefore not head-to-head in the traditional sense. The 830M wins in terms of raw average score when compared to the RTX 5080 SUPER, but this is an artifact of the different test methodologies. The RTX 5080 SUPER's score of 3,075 in Steel Nomad is a modern DX12 result, and its nearest rivals all fall within a 3.6 percent band, indicating that its performance in this specific test is well understood. For the 830M, the nearest rival data shows a similarly tight band of 0.5 percent, but across older API workloads. The benchmark results indicate that both GPUs sit in the middle of their respective peer groups, with no single rival dominating either one.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two parts is massive, and the recorded specifications make this clear. The GeForce 830M uses the GM108 chip, built on the Maxwell architecture, and belongs to the GeForce 800M generation. It is fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC, with 1,020 million transistors on a die size of 77 mm². The transistor density is 13.2 million per mm². The RTX 5080 SUPER uses the GB203 chip, based on the Blackwell 2.0 architecture, and belongs to the GeForce 50-series. It is fabricated on a 5 nm process, also at TSMC, with 45,600 million transistors on a die size of 378 mm². The transistor density is 120.6 million per mm². That is roughly nine times the transistor density, reflecting the node shrink and architectural evolution.

The shading resources differ by orders of magnitude. The 830M has 256 shading units, 16 texture mapping units, and 8 render output units. The RTX 5080 SUPER has 10,752 shading units, 336 TMUs, and 112 ROPs. The RTX 5080 SUPER also carries 84 ray tracing cores and 336 tensor cores, while the 830M has none of either. The pixel rate for the 830M is 9.200 GPixel/s, and its texture rate is 18.40 GTexel/s. The RTX 5080 SUPER reaches 293.1 GPixel/s and 879.3 GTexel/s. The FP32 compute figure for the 830M is 588.8 GFLOPS, while the RTX 5080 SUPER delivers 56.28 TFLOPS. The RTX 5080 SUPER also has FP16 performance at 56.28 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, while the 830M has no recorded FP16 figure.

Memory architecture is another major divider. The 830M has 2 GB of DDR3 memory on a 64-bit bus, with a bandwidth of 14.40 GB/s. Its memory clock is 900 MHz, or 1,800 Mbps effective. The RTX 5080 SUPER has 24 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 256-bit bus, with a bandwidth of 1.02 TB/s. Its memory clock is 2,000 MHz, or 32 Gbps effective. The bandwidth difference is roughly seventy-fold. The 830M uses a PCIe 3.0 x8 interface, while the RTX 5080 SUPER uses PCIe 5.0 x16. The power envelope also differs drastically: the 830M has a TDP of 33 W and is an IGP (integrated graphics package) with no power connectors, while the RTX 5080 SUPER has a TDP of 415 W and requires a single 16-pin power connector. The RTX 5080 SUPER is a dual-slot card measuring 304 mm in length, 137 mm in height, and 40 mm in width, while the 830M has no recorded dimensions and is listed as portable device dependent for display outputs. The 830M supports DirectX 12 (11_0), while the RTX 5080 SUPER supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

Where Each One Wins

The GeForce 830M wins in the context of its era and its intended use case. It is an end-of-life product from 2014, designed for portable devices with a 33 W TDP. Its benchmark scores in Geekbench OpenCL (4,324) and Geekbench Vulkan (3,590) show that it is competitive with the AMD Radeon R5 M420, the NVIDIA GeForce GT 745M, the NVIDIA Quadro K2000, and the AMD Radeon HD 6850 X2, all within a 0.5 percent band. For older DirectX 11-class workloads and light computing tasks, the 830M is a functional part. Its lack of RT and tensor cores means it has no ray tracing or AI acceleration capability, but for basic display output and legacy application support, it suffices. The 830M also wins on power efficiency in absolute terms, drawing only 33 W compared to the RTX 5080 SUPER's 415 W, though the performance per watt is not directly comparable given the different architectures.

The GeForce RTX 5080 SUPER wins in every modern performance metric. Its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 3,075 is a result from a demanding current-generation test, and its nearest rivals in that test (Quadro P1000, Intel Arc Pro B60, GeForce 820A, GeForce GTX 860M) are all within a 3.6 percent band. The RTX 5080 SUPER is an active product with a release date of 2025, built for contemporary gaming and compute workloads. Its 84 RT cores enable hardware ray tracing, and its 336 tensor cores enable AI acceleration, features the 830M lacks entirely. The 24 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 256-bit bus provides 1.02 TB/s of bandwidth, which is essential for high-resolution textures and large datasets. The RTX 5080 SUPER also supports PCIe 5.0 x16, offering far greater host interface bandwidth than the 830M's PCIe 3.0 x8. For any workload that leverages DirectX 12 Ultimate features, ray tracing, or tensor core operations, the RTX 5080 SUPER is the only one of the two that can participate.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score in the database?

A: The GeForce 830M has an average benchmark score of 3,957, while the RTX 5080 SUPER has an average benchmark score of 3,075. However, these scores come from different benchmark suites and are not directly comparable.

Q: What is the transistor count difference between the two GPUs?

A: The GeForce 830M has 1,020 million transistors, while the RTX 5080 SUPER has 45,600 million transistors. The RTX 5080 SUPER also uses a 5 nm process compared to the 830M's 28 nm process.

Q: Does the GeForce 830M support ray tracing?

A: No. The GeForce 830M has no ray tracing cores, while the RTX 5080 SUPER has 84 RT cores.

Q: How much memory bandwidth does each GPU provide?

A: The GeForce 830M provides 14.40 GB/s of bandwidth with 2 GB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus. The RTX 5080 SUPER provides 1.02 TB/s of bandwidth with 24 GB of GDDR7 on a 256-bit bus.

Q: What are the DirectX support levels for each GPU?

A: The GeForce 830M supports DirectX 12 (11_0), while the RTX 5080 SUPER supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2).

Q: Which GPU has tensor cores?

A: The RTX 5080 SUPER has 336 tensor cores. The GeForce 830M has no tensor cores.

The Verdict

The data in the database points to a straightforward conclusion for anyone choosing between these two GPUs. The GeForce 830M is an end-of-life part from 2014, built on Maxwell, with 2 GB of DDR3 memory and no ray tracing or tensor core support. Its benchmark results place it in a tight cluster with other low-power mobile and entry-level desktop parts from its generation, all within 0.5 percent of each other. It is suitable for legacy systems and basic computing tasks, and its 33 W TDP makes it appropriate for portable devices without dedicated power connectors. It should not be considered for any modern gaming or compute workload that requires DirectX 12 Ultimate features.

The RTX 5080 SUPER is an active product from the GeForce 50-series, built on Blackwell 2.0, with 24 GB of GDDR7 memory, 84 RT cores, and 336 tensor cores. Its single recorded benchmark score in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 places it in a peer group that includes the Quadro P1000 and Intel Arc Pro B60, with deltas of 2.8 percent and 3.4 percent respectively. For any application that uses ray tracing, AI acceleration, or high-bandwidth memory, the RTX 5080 SUPER is the only viable choice. Its PCIe 5.0 x16 interface and dual-slot cooling solution reflect a desktop-class component. The choice is clear: the RTX 5080 SUPER for any modern workload, the GeForce 830M only for historical or ultra-low-power scenarios. The 830M's higher average score and higher percentile (24 vs 19) are artifacts of the different benchmark suites, not indicators of real-world performance superiority.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two GPUs in the database:

• Architecture: Maxwell vs Blackwell 2.0
• Process Node: 28 nm vs 5 nm
• Transistors: 1,020 million vs 45,600 million
• Die Size: 77 mm² vs 378 mm²
• Transistor Density: 13.2M / mm² vs 120.6M / mm²
• Base Clock: 1082 MHz vs 2295 MHz
• Boost Clock: 1150 MHz vs 2617 MHz
• Memory Clock: 900 MHz / 1800 Mbps effective vs 2000 MHz / 32 Gbps effective
• Memory Size: 2 GB vs 24 GB
• Memory Type: DDR3 vs GDDR7
• Memory Bus Width: 64 bit vs 256 bit
• Memory Bandwidth: 14.40 GB/s vs 1.02 TB/s
• Shading Units: 256 vs 10,752
• TMUs: 16 vs 336
• ROPs: 8 vs 112
• RT Cores: None vs 84
• Tensor Cores: None vs 336
• Pixel Rate: 9.200 GPixel/s vs 293.1 GPixel/s
• Texture Rate: 18.40 GTexel/s vs 879.3 GTexel/s
• FP32: 588.8 GFLOPS vs 56.28 TFLOPS
• FP16: None vs 56.28 TFLOPS (1:1)
• TDP: 33 W vs 415 W
• Slot Width: IGP vs Dual-slot
• Power Connectors: None vs 1x 16-pin
• Bus Interface: PCIe 3.0 x8 vs PCIe 5.0 x16
• Display Outputs: Portable Device Dependent vs 1x HDMI 2.1b, 3x DisplayPort 2.1b
• DirectX Support: 12 (11_0) vs 12 Ultimate (12_2)
• Dimensions: Not recorded vs 304 mm x 137 mm x 40 mm
• Production Status: End-of-life vs Active
• Release Date: 2014-03-11 vs 2025-12-31
• Generation: GeForce 800M vs GeForce 50