NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M vs NVIDIA Quadro P400 Comparison

# NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M vs NVIDIA Quadro P400

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M and NVIDIA Quadro P400 occupy very different positions in the GPU landscape, despite both coming from NVIDIA. The GTX 980M is a mobile gaming-class part built on the Maxwell 2.0 architecture, while the Quadro P400 is a low-profile workstation card based on Pascal. In the two shared benchmark tests recorded in the database, the GTX 980M dominates outright, but the comparison is less about raw speed and more about what each card was designed to accomplish. The GTX 980M sits at the 31st percentile among all GPUs, while the Quadro P400 ranks at the 27th percentile, indicating that neither card is near the top of the overall performance hierarchy, but their strengths and weaknesses are clearly differentiated by workload.

Where Each One Wins

The GTX 980M wins every head-to-head benchmark recorded in the database. In Geekbench OpenCL, the GTX 980M scores 23,832 points against the Quadro P400's 4,249 points, a gap of 460.9 percent. In Geekbench Vulkan, the GTX 980M scores 17,703 points versus 5,119 points for the Quadro P400, a difference of 245.8 percent. These are not marginal victories; the GTX 980M is between roughly 2.5 and 5.6 times faster depending on the test.

However, the Quadro P400 is not without its own distinct positioning. The database shows the Quadro P400 has a 30 W thermal design power, a single-slot form factor, and no power connectors required, with a suggested power supply of 200 W. It measures 150 mm in length and 69 mm in height. The GTX 980M, by contrast, is an MXM Module with no specified TDP in the record, and its display outputs are listed as "Portable Device Dependent," meaning it is designed to be integrated into laptops rather than standalone workstations. The Quadro P400 offers 3x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, making it a more flexible option for multi-monitor professional setups.

The GTX 980M also holds an advantage in memory capacity and bandwidth. It has 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 160.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The Quadro P400 has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 64-bit bus, with 32.06 GB/s of bandwidth. For tasks that involve large textures, high-resolution framebuffers, or data-heavy compute workloads, the GTX 980M's memory subsystem provides a substantial edge. The Quadro P400's smaller memory pool and narrower bus limit its ability to handle such workloads efficiently.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two cards is significant. The GTX 980M uses the GM204 chip on TSMC's 28 nm process, with 5,200 million transistors on a 398 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 13.1 million per square millimeter. The Quadro P400 uses the GP107 chip on Samsung's 14 nm process, with 3,300 million transistors on a 132 mm² die, for a transistor density of 25.0 million per square millimeter. The Quadro P400 is built on a more advanced process node, which explains its much smaller die and higher density, but the GTX 980M has far more silicon area dedicated to compute resources.

The GTX 980M packs 1,536 shading units, 96 texture mapping units, and 64 render output units. The Quadro P400 has only 256 shading units, 16 texture mapping units, and 16 render output units. This disparity in core counts is the primary reason for the GTX 980M's massive performance lead in compute-heavy benchmarks. The GTX 980M also has higher clock speeds in terms of raw throughput: its base clock is 1038 MHz with a boost of 1127 MHz, while the Quadro P400 runs at 1228 MHz base and 1252 MHz boost. Despite the Quadro P400's higher clocks, its far smaller core count cannot compensate for the GTX 980M's sixfold advantage in shading units.

The memory clocks also differ notably. The GTX 980M runs its GDDR5 at 1253 MHz, which translates to 5 Gbps effective, while the Quadro P400 runs at 1002 MHz, or 4 Gbps effective. Combined with the bus width difference, this yields the aforementioned bandwidth gap. The GTX 980M achieves a pixel rate of 72.13 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 108.2 GTexel/s, while the Quadro P400 manages 20.03 GPixel/s and 20.03 GTexel/s. The FP32 compute throughput is 3.462 TFLOPS for the GTX 980M versus 641.0 GFLOPS for the Quadro P400, a difference of more than fivefold.

Both cards support DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API-level compatibility is identical. However, the Quadro P400 has a distinct advantage in form factor and power efficiency. Its 30 W TDP is dramatically lower than the unspecified power draw of the GTX 980M, and its single-slot design with no external power connectors makes it far easier to install in compact systems. The Quadro P400 also supports a PCIe 3.0 x16 interface, while the GTX 980M uses MXM-B (3.0), which is a mobile-specific connector.

The Verdict

The data clearly indicates that for raw performance, the GTX 980M is the superior card. Across the two head-to-head benchmarks, it wins both, with a 460.9 percent lead in OpenCL and a 245.8 percent lead in Vulkan. The GTX 980M's average benchmark score of 5,308 places it just 0.2 percent below the NVIDIA GeForce 930A, 0.3 percent below the GeForce 840M, 0.5 percent above the GeForce 940M, and 0.9 percent below the AMD Radeon R7 M445. The Quadro P400's average score of 4,684 places it 0.6 percent below the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT 16 GB and the AMD Radeon R5 M320, 0.9 percent above the AMD Radeon R8 M445DX, and 1.2 percent below the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M. These nearest-rival comparisons show that both cards sit in a similar overall performance band, despite the GTX 980M's dominance in the head-to-head tests.

The choice between these two cards depends entirely on the use case. For users who need maximum compute throughput, large memory capacity, and high bandwidth, the GTX 980M is the clear pick. Its 8 GB frame buffer and 160.4 GB/s bandwidth make it suitable for demanding gaming or compute workloads that require substantial data movement. The Quadro P400, on the other hand, is designed for professional environments where space, power, and display connectivity matter more than raw speed. Its 30 W TDP, single-slot profile, and 3x mini-DisplayPort outputs make it an attractive option for multi-monitor office setups or entry-level workstation tasks that do not stress the GPU heavily.

It is important to note that the GTX 980M is an end-of-life product released in October 2014, while the Quadro P400 is also end-of-life, released in February 2017. Neither card is current, but the Quadro P400's more recent release date and advanced 14 nm process give it a power efficiency advantage. The GTX 980M's predecessor is the GeForce 800M, and its successor is the GeForce 10 Mobile. The Quadro P400's predecessor is the Quadro Maxwell, and its successor is the Quadro Volta. These lineage details confirm that the two cards come from different product families with different design philosophies.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The GTX 980M scores 23,832 points in Geekbench OpenCL, while the Quadro P400 scores 4,249 points. The GTX 980M leads by 460.9 percent.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference between the two cards?

A: The GTX 980M has 8 GB of GDDR5 memory, while the Quadro P400 has 2 GB of GDDR5 memory. The GTX 980M also has a 256-bit memory bus compared to the Quadro P400's 64-bit bus.

Q: Which card has a higher pixel fill rate?

A: The GTX 980M achieves 72.13 GPixel/s, while the Quadro P400 achieves 20.03 GPixel/s. This gives the GTX 980M more than a threefold advantage in pixel throughput.

Q: How do the two cards compare in terms of power consumption?

A: The Quadro P400 has a specified TDP of 30 W and a suggested power supply of 200 W, while the GTX 980M has no TDP listed in the database. The Quadro P400 also requires no power connectors, whereas the GTX 980M's power connector is listed as "None" in the context of its MXM module design.

Q: What display outputs does the Quadro P400 offer?

A: The Quadro P400 provides 3x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. The GTX 980M's display outputs are listed as "Portable Device Dependent," reflecting its mobile-oriented design.

Q: Which card has a higher FP32 compute throughput?

A: The GTX 980M delivers 3.462 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the Quadro P400 delivers 641.0 GFLOPS. The GTX 980M is more than five times faster in this metric.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results in the database are limited to two tests, but they are decisive. In Geekbench OpenCL, the GTX 980M scores 23,832, and the Quadro P400 scores 4,249. The delta of 460.9 percent is enormous, reflecting the GTX 980M's vastly larger shading unit count and memory subsystem. This test is typically representative of general-purpose GPU compute workloads, and the GTX 980M's 1,536 shading units simply overwhelm the Quadro P400's 256 units. The memory bandwidth difference also plays a role, as the GTX 980M can feed its cores at 160.4 GB/s, while the Quadro P400 is limited to 32.06 GB/s.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the gap narrows somewhat but remains lopsided. The GTX 980M scores 17,703, while the Quadro P400 scores 5,119, a 245.8 percent difference. Vulkan is a lower-level API that can expose architectural inefficiencies, and the Quadro P400's smaller core count and narrower memory bus are still major liabilities. The GTX 980M's higher pixel rate of 72.13 GPixel/s and texture rate of 108.2 GTexel/s also contribute to its Vulkan performance, as these metrics reflect the card's ability to process geometry and textures quickly.

The GTX 980M also has a broader benchmark profile in the database, with scores for 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 (649), Passmark DirectX 10 (35), DirectX 11 (57), DirectX 12 (31), DirectX 9 (125), G2D (490), G3D (7,338), and GPU Compute (2,816). The Quadro P400 has only the two Geekbench results recorded. This disparity in available data means the Quadro P400's average benchmark score of 4,684 is computed from a smaller sample, but it still places the card within the same performance neighborhood as its nearest rivals, which include the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT 16 GB and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M.

The GTX 980M's nearest rivals include the GeForce 930A, 840M, and 940M, as well as the AMD Radeon R7 M445. These cards all have average scores within roughly one percent of the GTX 980M's 5,308 average, confirming that the GTX 980M, despite being a high-end mobile part at its release, now performs in line with mid-range mobile GPUs from later generations. The Quadro P400's nearest rivals are similarly clustered, with the GTX 970M sitting just 1.2 percent above it. This suggests that for users comparing these two cards today, the GTX 980M is the more powerful option in absolutely every recorded metric, but the Quadro P400 offers a compact, low-power alternative that excels in professional workstation environments where multi-display output and physical footprint are priorities.