NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 represent two very different approaches to GPU design, separated by nearly a decade of architectural evolution. The data shows a clear split: the mobile Ampere part wins the majority of head-to-head tests, taking 5 of 8 benchmarks, while the older desktop Maxwell flagship retains a decisive edge in specific legacy and compute workloads. The RTX 3050 A Mobile is the modern choice for current-generation APIs and compute via OpenCL, while the GTX 980 remains a formidable contender for legacy DirectX 9 performance and raw 2D throughput.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark results draw a distinct line between the two GPUs based on workload type. The RTX 3050 A Mobile dominates the modern API landscape, winning every DirectX 10, 11, and 12 test, alongside a massive victory in Geekbench OpenCL. Its wins include a 15.1% lead in DirectX 10, a 13.3% lead in DirectX 11, and a 19.6% lead in DirectX 12, showing that the newer architecture scales better with contemporary rendering features and driver optimizations. The single biggest victory is in Geekbench OpenCL, where the RTX 3050 A Mobile scores 52998 against 34676, a 52.8% margin that highlights the efficiency of its compute pipelines.

The GTX 980, conversely, claims its wins in areas that favor raw rasterization throughput and legacy support. It wins DirectX 9 by 7.3% (164 vs 152), Passmark G2D by 33.6% (792 vs 526), and Passmark GPU Compute by 7% (4753 vs 4419). The G2D result is particularly telling: the GTX 980’s 792 score versus 526 for the RTX 3050 A Mobile is the largest proportional gap in either direction, suggesting that the older card’s memory subsystem and driver path for 2D operations are more optimized. The Passmark G3D test is close, with the RTX 3050 A Mobile edging out a 5.1% win (11664 vs 11095), indicating that overall 3D rasterization performance is comparable, but the newer card has the advantage.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are built on fundamentally different processes and designs. The RTX 3050 A Mobile uses the GA106 chip on an 8 nm Samsung process, packing 12,000 million transistors into a 276 mm² die, achieving a transistor density of 43.5M per mm². In contrast, the GTX 980 uses the GM204 chip on a 28 nm TSMC process, with 5,200 million transistors on a much larger 398 mm² die, resulting in a far lower density of 13.1M per mm². This process gap explains the power and feature disparities: the RTX 3050 A Mobile is an integrated mobile part with a 45 W TDP and no power connectors, while the GTX 980 is a dual-slot desktop card drawing 165 W through two 6-pin connectors with a suggested 450 W PSU.

Architecturally, the RTX 3050 A Mobile is an Ampere-generation part with 1792 shading units, 56 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, augmented by 14 RT cores and 56 tensor cores. The GTX 980, based on Maxwell 2.0, has more raw units — 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs — but lacks any ray tracing or tensor core acceleration. The memory configurations differ as well: the RTX 3050 A Mobile uses 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus for 192.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the GTX 980 uses 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus for 224.4 GB/s. The GTX 980’s wider bus gives it a bandwidth advantage, but the RTX 3050 A Mobile’s GDDR6 operates at a higher effective speed of 12 Gbps versus 7 Gbps. The RTX 3050 A Mobile also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the GTX 980 is limited to DirectX 12 (12_1).

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most decisive result is Geekbench OpenCL, where the RTX 3050 A Mobile scores 52998, a 52.8% improvement over the GTX 980’s 34676. This is not a marginal win; it indicates that the Ampere architecture’s compute throughput, likely aided by its tensor cores, is far superior for general-purpose GPU workloads. In Passmark DirectX 12, the RTX 3050 A Mobile’s 55 score versus 46 represents a 19.6% lead, confirming that the newer card handles modern draw calls and feature levels more efficiently. The DirectX 10 and 11 tests show similar trends, with the RTX 3050 A Mobile ahead by 15.1% (61 vs 53) and 13.3% (94 vs 83) respectively.

However, the GTX 980 fights back in legacy and specific compute scenarios. In Passmark DirectX 9, the GTX 980 scores 164 against 152, a 7.3% win that suggests its fixed-function pipeline is better tuned for older games. The Passmark G2D test is a rout: the GTX 980’s 792 score dwarfs the RTX 3050 A Mobile’s 526, a 33.6% margin. This is likely due to the GTX 980’s higher ROP count (64 vs 32) and wider memory bus, which accelerates 2D blits and UI rendering. In Passmark GPU Compute, the GTX 980 wins 4753 to 4419, a 7% edge, showing that pure compute without modern acceleration features still favors the older card’s higher shading unit count. The Passmark G3D result is the closest overall: the RTX 3050 A Mobile wins 11664 to 11095, a 5.1% margin that aligns with the cards’ near-identical FP32 throughput of 4.813 TFLOPS and 4.981 TFLOPS respectively.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear verdict: the RTX 3050 A Mobile is the superior GPU for modern workloads, while the GTX 980 is the better choice for legacy titles and specific 2D-heavy applications. The RTX 3050 A Mobile’s wins in DirectX 10, 11, and 12, combined with its massive OpenCL advantage, make it the logical pick for anyone running current games or GPU-accelerated compute tasks. Its 44th percentile ranking versus 43rd for the GTX 980, and its higher average benchmark score of 8746 against 8167, confirm that it is the stronger overall performer. The RTX 3050 A Mobile also offers features the GTX 980 cannot match: ray tracing cores, tensor cores, and DirectX 12 Ultimate support, all within a 45 W power envelope versus 165 W.

That said, the GTX 980 is not obsolete. Its 33.6% lead in G2D performance and 7.3% win in DirectX 9 make it a viable option for users whose primary workload involves older software or 2D rendering. Its higher texture rate (155.6 GTexel/s vs 75.21 GTexel/s) and pixel rate (77.82 GPixel/s vs 42.98 GPixel/s) also give it an edge in fill-rate-bound scenarios, which explains its compute win. For a desktop user with a 450 W PSU and space for a dual-slot card, the GTX 980 remains a capable legacy GPU. However, for a laptop user or anyone prioritizing modern API support and compute efficiency, the RTX 3050 A Mobile is the data-backed winner.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile has an average benchmark score of 8746, compared to 8167 for the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980.

Q: What is the largest performance gap in the head-to-head tests?

A: The largest gap is in Geekbench OpenCL, where the RTX 3050 A Mobile scores 52998 versus 34676 for the GTX 980, a 52.8% difference.

Q: Does the GTX 980 win any modern API benchmarks?

A: No, the GTX 980 does not win any DirectX 10, 11, or 12 tests. Its wins are limited to DirectX 9, Passmark G2D, and Passmark GPU Compute.

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

A: The GTX 980 has a higher memory bandwidth of 224.4 GB/s, while the RTX 3050 A Mobile has 192.0 GB/s.

Q: Which GPU has a higher transistor density?

A: The RTX 3050 A Mobile has a transistor density of 43.5M per mm², significantly higher than the GTX 980’s 13.1M per mm².

Q: How do the power requirements compare?

A: The RTX 3050 A Mobile has a 45 W TDP and no power connectors, while the GTX 980 has a 165 W TDP and requires two 6-pin power connectors.

Specification Differences

The following table lists only the fields where the two GPUs differ, based on the data provided:

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 |

|----------------|--------------------------------|------------------------|

| Chip | GA106 | GM204 |

| Architecture | Ampere | Maxwell 2.0 |

| Process Node | 8 nm | 28 nm |

| Foundry | Samsung | TSMC |

| Transistors | 12,000 million | 5,200 million |

| Die Size | 276 mm² | 398 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 43.5M / mm² | 13.1M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1065 MHz | 1127 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1343 MHz | 1216 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1500 MHz 12 Gbps effective | 1753 MHz 7 Gbps effective |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 192.0 GB/s | 224.4 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 1792 | 2048 |

| TMUs | 56 | 128 |

| ROPs | 32 | 64 |

| RT Cores | 14 | null |

| Tensor Cores | 56 | null |

| Pixel Rate | 42.98 GPixel/s | 77.82 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 75.21 GTexel/s | 155.6 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 4.813 TFLOPS | 4.981 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 4.813 TFLOPS (1:1) | null |

| TDP | 45 W | 165 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | 2x 6-pin |

| Suggested PSU | null | 450 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.2 |

| DirectX Support | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12 (12_1) |

| Release Date | 2023-12-31 | 2014-09-18 |

| Predecessor | GeForce 20 Mobile | GeForce 700 |

| Successor | null | GeForce 10 |

| Launch MSRP | null | 549 USD |

| Percentile | 44 | 43 |

| Avg Benchmark Score | 8746 | 8167 |