NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Comparison

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the GTX 980 than the GTX 960M in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The GTX 980 scores 34,676 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the GTX 960M scores 11,045. That is a delta of 68.1% in favor of the GTX 980, making it the clear winner in this compute workload.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The GTX 980 has 2,048 shading units, compared to 640 on the GTX 960M. The GTX 980 also has 128 texture mapping units and 64 ROPs, versus 40 TMUs and 16 ROPs on the GTX 960M.

Q: Do both cards support DirectX 12?

A: Yes, but at different feature levels. The GTX 980 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while the GTX 960M supports DirectX 12 (11_0). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference between the two?

A: The GTX 980 has a 256-bit memory bus and delivers 224.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The GTX 960M uses a 128-bit bus and delivers 80.19 GB/s. The GTX 980 offers nearly three times the memory bandwidth.

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The GTX 960M has an average benchmark score of 9,645, while the GTX 980 averages 8,167. However, the GTX 980 wins both head-to-head benchmark tests, and the GTX 960M's average is boosted by its specific test set.

Q: What is the transistor count difference?

A: The GTX 980 uses 5,200 million transistors on a 398 mm² die. The GTX 960M uses 1,870 million transistors on a 148 mm² die. Both are built on a 28 nm TSMC process.

Architecture Differences

The GTX 960M is built on the GM107 chip, which uses the original Maxwell architecture. The GTX 980 uses the GM204 chip with Maxwell 2.0. This is not a minor naming difference: Maxwell 2.0 introduces architectural improvements that directly affect feature support and efficiency. The GTX 980 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), a higher feature level than the GTX 960M's DirectX 12 (11_0). That means the GTX 980 can handle more advanced DirectX 12 rendering techniques.

The die size difference is substantial. The GTX 980's GM204 die measures 398 mm², while the GTX 960M's GM107 die is only 148 mm². Transistor density is similar at 13.1M per mm² for the GTX 980 versus 12.6M per mm² for the GTX 960M, but the GTX 980 packs 5,200 million transistors versus 1,870 million. That raw transistor budget translates into a much wider execution engine.

The GTX 980 has 2,048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The GTX 960M has 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The GTX 980's ROP count is four times higher, which matters for pixel-heavy workloads. The GTX 960M uses an MXM-B (3.0) bus interface and is a mobile module, while the GTX 980 uses PCIe 3.0 x16 and is a dual-slot desktop card. The GTX 960M has no power connectors, while the GTX 980 requires two 6-pin connectors and a 450 W suggested PSU.

Both cards use 4 GB of GDDR5 memory, but the GTX 980 has a 256-bit memory bus versus 128-bit on the GTX 960M. The GTX 980 runs its memory at 1753 MHz (7 Gbps effective), while the GTX 960M runs at 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective). The result is 224.4 GB/s of bandwidth for the GTX 980 versus 80.19 GB/s for the GTX 960M.

The GTX 980 has higher clock speeds as well: 1127 MHz base and 1216 MHz boost, compared to 1097 MHz base and 1176 MHz boost on the GTX 960M. The GTX 980 is a desktop part with a 165 W TDP and dual-slot cooler, while the GTX 960M is rated at 75 W and comes as an MXM module. The GTX 980's display outputs include 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, and 3x DisplayPort 1.2, whereas the GTX 960M's outputs are listed as portable device dependent.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records two head-to-head benchmark comparisons between these cards, and the GTX 980 wins both. The margin is not close.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the GTX 980 scores 34,676 against the GTX 960M's 11,045. That is a delta of 68.1% in favor of the GTX 980. This is a compute workload that stresses raw shader throughput and memory bandwidth, and the GTX 980's 2,048 shading units and 224.4 GB/s bandwidth dominate. The GTX 960M's 640 shading units and 80.19 GB/s bandwidth simply cannot keep pace.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the GTX 980 scores 22,543 against the GTX 960M's 8,245. The delta is 63.4% in favor of the GTX 980. Vulkan workloads scale with the same resources that OpenCL uses: shader count, memory bandwidth, and driver efficiency. The GTX 980's advantage holds across both API tests.

The GTX 980 also has standalone benchmark data that shows its range. It scores 15,163 in Geekbench Metal, 11,095 in Passmark G3D, and 4,753 in Passmark GPU Compute. The GTX 960M only has Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan scores recorded. The GTX 980's Passmark DirectX scores are 164 in DirectX 9, 83 in DirectX 11, 53 in DirectX 10, and 46 in DirectX 12. These figures illustrate that the GTX 980's performance is consistent across a wide range of workloads, not just compute.

The average benchmark scores tell a different story at first glance. The GTX 960M averages 9,645, while the GTX 980 averages 8,167. This is because the GTX 980's average includes a broader and more demanding test suite, including multiple Passmark DirectX tests and 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, where it scores only 474. The GTX 960M's average is based solely on its two Geekbench results. The head-to-head tests are the more reliable comparison, and they are unambiguous.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every major specification. The GTX 960M uses the GM107 chip, while the GTX 980 uses the GM204 chip. The GTX 960M is Maxwell, the GTX 980 is Maxwell 2.0. The GTX 960M is in the GeForce 900M generation, the GTX 980 is in the GeForce 900 generation.

Process node is the same: both use 28 nm TSMC. Transistor count differs substantially: 1,870 million on the GTX 960M versus 5,200 million on the GTX 980. Die size is 148 mm² versus 398 mm². Transistor density is slightly higher on the GTX 980 at 13.1M per mm² versus 12.6M per mm².

Clock speeds: the GTX 960M runs at 1097 MHz base and 1176 MHz boost. The GTX 980 runs at 1127 MHz base and 1216 MHz boost. Memory clocks are 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective) for the GTX 960M and 1753 MHz (7 Gbps effective) for the GTX 980.

Memory configuration: both have 4 GB of GDDR5, but the GTX 960M has a 128-bit bus while the GTX 980 has a 256-bit bus. Bandwidth is 80.19 GB/s versus 224.4 GB/s.

Compute resources: the GTX 960M has 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The GTX 980 has 2,048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. Pixel rate is 18.82 GPixel/s for the GTX 960M versus 77.82 GPixel/s for the GTX 980. Texture rate is 47.04 GTexel/s versus 155.6 GTexel/s. FP32 throughput is 1.505 TFLOPS versus 4.981 TFLOPS.

Power and physical design: the GTX 960M has a 75 W TDP, is an MXM module, and has no power connectors. The GTX 980 has a 165 W TDP, is dual-slot, requires 2x 6-pin power connectors, and has a suggested PSU of 450 W. The GTX 980 measures 267 mm in length, 111 mm in height, and 40 mm in width. The GTX 960M has no listed dimensions.

API support: both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4, but DirectX differs. The GTX 960M supports DirectX 12 (11_0), while the GTX 980 supports DirectX 12 (12_1). Release dates also differ: the GTX 980 came out on 2014-09-18, while the GTX 960M was released on 2015-03-12. The GTX 980 has a launch MSRP of 549 USD. The GTX 960M has no recorded launch MSRP.

The Verdict

The data is clear: the GTX 980 is the far more powerful card. In the only two head-to-head benchmarks available, it wins both by over 60%. The GTX 980 has more than three times the shading units, four times the ROPs, and nearly three times the memory bandwidth. It also has a higher base clock, higher boost clock, and higher memory clock. The GTX 980's FP32 throughput of 4.981 TFLOPS is more than three times the GTX 960M's 1.505 TFLOPS.

The GTX 960M is a mobile part designed for laptops. It has a 75 W TDP, no power connectors, and an MXM form factor. The GTX 980 is a desktop card with a 165 W TDP, two 6-pin connectors, and a suggested 450 W PSU. These are different classes of hardware. The GTX 960M trades performance for portability and power efficiency. The GTX 980 uses its power budget to deliver desktop-class performance.

The GTX 980's DirectX 12 (12_1) support gives it a feature-level advantage over the GTX 960M's DirectX 12 (11_0). For users who care about modern rendering features, this matters. The GTX 980 also has a wider range of benchmark results recorded, including strong Passmark G3D and Geekbench Metal scores.

The GTX 960M's average benchmark score of 9,645 is higher than the GTX 980's 8,167, but this is misleading. The GTX 960M's average is based on only two Geekbench tests, while the GTX 980's average includes a much larger and more demanding test suite. The head-to-head results are the definitive comparison, and they favor the GTX 980 decisively.

Where Each One Wins

The GTX 980 wins in every head-to-head benchmark recorded. In Geekbench OpenCL, it is 68.1% ahead of the GTX 960M. In Geekbench Vulkan, it is 63.4% ahead. If the workload is compute-heavy, the GTX 980 is the obvious choice. Its 2,048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 224.4 GB/s of bandwidth provide a massive execution advantage. The GTX 980 also supports DirectX 12 (12_1), which gives it a feature advantage in modern games and applications.

The GTX 980 is the right choice for any desktop build where performance is the priority. It has the pixel rate (77.82 GPixel/s), texture rate (155.6 GTexel/s), and FP32 throughput (4.981 TFLOPS) to handle demanding workloads. Its dual-slot cooler and 165 W TDP require a suitable case and a 450 W PSU, but the performance payoff is substantial.

The GTX 960M wins in portability and power efficiency. It is an MXM module rated at 75 W with no power connectors, designed for laptops and compact systems. Its 148 mm² die and 1,870 million transistors make it far smaller and lighter than the GTX 980's 398 mm² die. The GTX 960M also has a higher average benchmark score of 9,645 in the database, though this is based on a narrower test set.

For users who need a discrete GPU in a portable device, the GTX 960M is the practical choice. For users who need maximum performance in a desktop system, the GTX 980 is the clear winner. The two cards are not direct competitors; they serve different form factors and power envelopes. The benchmark data shows that the GTX 980 delivers roughly three times the compute throughput, and that is the deciding factor for any performance-oriented use case.