NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile vs NVIDIA GRID M60-1Q Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive outcome in the only directly comparable benchmark. In the Geekbench Vulkan test, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile scores 145,807, while the NVIDIA GRID M60-1Q scores 31,220. This gives the RTX 4080 Mobile a 367% advantage, a lead so substantial that it defines the entire comparison. The GRID M60-1Q has no benchmark victories in the database; the head-to-head record stands at 1 win for the RTX 4080 Mobile and 0 for the GRID M60-1Q.

Context from the nearest rivals table reinforces this margin. The RTX 4080 Mobile’s average benchmark score is 38,135, which places it 1.3% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 (average score 37,648) and 1.3% ahead of the NVIDIA Tesla P4 (average score 37,628). It also sits 0.4% behind the NVIDIA GeForce MX570 (average score 38,299) and 0.6% behind the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 Mobile (average score 38,349). The GRID M60-1Q, with an average score of 31,220, is statistically indistinguishable from the NVIDIA Quadro M5000 (average score 31,206, delta 0%) and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER (average score 31,087, delta 0.4%). It trails the NVIDIA RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell by 1% (average score 31,532) and the NVIDIA TITAN RTX by 1.4% (average score 31,676).

What these numbers indicate is that the GRID M60-1Q, despite its age, still occupies a performance tier near modern mid-range cards in aggregate scoring. However, the Vulkan result is not close. A 367% delta means the RTX 4080 Mobile is not merely faster; it is in a different performance class. The GRID M60-1Q’s single recorded benchmark is its only data point, whereas the RTX 4080 Mobile has a broader benchmark suite, including scores of 159,575 in Geekbench OpenCL, 24,926 in Passmark G3D, and 11,191 in Passmark GPU Compute. Even the RTX 4080 Mobile’s weakest recorded result, 96 in Passmark DirectX 12, reflects a workload-specific pattern rather than overall weakness, since its Passmark DirectX 11 score is 244 and its DirectX 9 score is 286.

The percentile ranking further separates the two. The RTX 4080 Mobile sits at the 81st percentile among all GPUs, while the GRID M60-1Q sits at the 76th percentile. That five-point gap, combined with the Vulkan result, shows that the RTX 4080 Mobile delivers a higher peak and a higher floor across the recorded tests.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 4080 Mobile wins in every scenario where a measurable comparison exists. The Vulkan API test is the sole head-to-head data point, and the RTX 4080 Mobile dominates it. For users running Vulkan-based workloads, such as modern game engines or compute applications that leverage this API, the RTX 4080 Mobile offers a 367% performance lead. That is not a marginal improvement; it is a generational leap.

The GRID M60-1Q, by contrast, has no recorded wins. Its value lies in its specific design purpose rather than raw speed. The database lists it with no display outputs, a dual-slot form factor, a 1x 8-pin power connector, and a suggested power supply of 550 W. These characteristics indicate a server or virtualization-oriented card, where the absence of display outputs is intentional. The GRID M60-1Q is built for datacenter deployment, likely for GPU-pass-through or virtual desktop infrastructure, where multiple users share a single physical GPU. In such environments, the 1,024 MB memory allocation and 256-bit bus are adequate for legacy workloads, but the 28 nm process node and Maxwell 2.0 architecture limit its efficiency.

For gaming or high-performance compute on a laptop, the RTX 4080 Mobile is the clear choice. Its 12 GB memory, 192-bit bus, and 432.0 GB/s bandwidth support modern asset-heavy applications. The GRID M60-1Q, with 1,024 MB memory and 160.4 GB/s bandwidth, would bottleneck on anything beyond basic 2D or low-resolution 3D tasks. The RTX 4080 Mobile also integrates 58 RT cores and 232 tensor cores, hardware that the GRID M60-1Q lacks entirely. Any workload involving ray tracing or AI inference, including DLSS-style upscaling, runs only on the RTX 4080 Mobile.

The GRID M60-1Q’s only advantage is its established driver ecosystem for virtualization. The database shows its production status as end-of-life, while the RTX 4080 Mobile remains active. For new deployments, the GRID M60-1Q is a legacy part, and its 2015 release date places it two generations behind the RTX 4080 Mobile’s 2023 release date.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different eras and different design philosophies. The RTX 4080 Mobile uses the AD104 chip built on a 5 nm process at TSMC, with 35,800 million transistors on a 294 mm² die. That yields a transistor density of 121.8 million per square millimeter. The GRID M60-1Q uses the GM204 chip on a 28 nm process, also at TSMC, with 5,200 million transistors on a larger 398 mm² die. Its transistor density is 13.1 million per square millimeter. The density difference, roughly 9.3 times, explains why the RTX 4080 Mobile achieves far higher performance despite a smaller physical die.

The Ada Lovelace architecture in the RTX 4080 Mobile supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the Maxwell 2.0 architecture in the GRID M60-1Q supports only DirectX 12 (12_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4, but the feature level for DirectX differs, meaning the RTX 4080 Mobile can handle newer shader models and ray tracing APIs. The RTX 4080 Mobile also has 7,424 shading units, 232 texture mapping units, and 80 render output units. The GRID M60-1Q has 2,048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. In raw throughput, the RTX 4080 Mobile delivers 24.72 TFLOPS FP32, while the GRID M60-1Q delivers 4.825 TFLOPS FP32. The RTX 4080 Mobile also has a 1:1 FP16 ratio at 24.72 TFLOPS, whereas the GRID M60-1Q has no recorded FP16 capability.

Clock speeds reflect the same generational gap. The RTX 4080 Mobile has a base clock of 1290 MHz and a boost clock of 1665 MHz. The GRID M60-1Q has a base clock of 557 MHz and a boost clock of 1178 MHz. Memory clocks differ as well: the RTX 4080 Mobile runs at 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective data rate, while the GRID M60-1Q runs at 1253 MHz with 5 Gbps effective. The RTX 4080 Mobile’s pixel rate is 133.2 GPixel/s and texture rate is 386.3 GTexel/s, versus 75.39 GPixel/s and 150.8 GTexel/s for the GRID M60-1Q.

Power and form factor also diverge. The RTX 4080 Mobile is an integrated graphics package (IGP) with no power connectors and a 110 W TDP, designed for laptops. The GRID M60-1Q is a dual-slot card with a 1x 8-pin connector, a 225 W TDP, and a suggested power supply of 550 W. The GRID M60-1Q measures 267 mm in length. The RTX 4080 Mobile has no listed dimensions, consistent with a mobile part soldered to a motherboard.

Bus interfaces differ too. The RTX 4080 Mobile uses PCIe 4.0 x16, while the GRID M60-1Q uses PCIe 3.0 x16. The newer interface doubles the theoretical bandwidth, which matters for data transfer between the GPU and CPU. Display outputs also differ: the RTX 4080 Mobile is portable-device dependent, meaning outputs depend on the laptop design, while the GRID M60-1Q has no outputs at all, reinforcing its server-only role.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile has an average benchmark score of 38,135, compared to 31,220 for the NVIDIA GRID M60-1Q. The RTX 4080 Mobile also ranks at the 81st percentile among all GPUs, while the GRID M60-1Q ranks at the 76th percentile.

Q: How large is the performance gap in the only shared benchmark?

A: In Geekbench Vulkan, the RTX 4080 Mobile scores 145,807 versus 31,220 for the GRID M60-1Q, a 367% difference. This is the sole head-to-head benchmark recorded in the database.

Q: Does the GRID M60-1Q support ray tracing or tensor operations?

A: No. The GRID M60-1Q has no RT cores and no tensor cores. The RTX 4080 Mobile includes 58 RT cores and 232 tensor cores, which enable hardware-accelerated ray tracing and AI workloads.

Q: What are the memory specifications for each GPU?

A: The RTX 4080 Mobile has 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus with 432.0 GB/s bandwidth. The GRID M60-1Q has 1,024 MB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus with 160.4 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU is more power-efficient?

A: The RTX 4080 Mobile has a TDP of 110 W and requires no power connectors. The GRID M60-1Q has a TDP of 225 W, requires a 1x 8-pin connector, and suggests a 550 W power supply. The RTX 4080 Mobile delivers higher performance at roughly half the power draw.

Q: Are both GPUs still in production?

A: No. The RTX 4080 Mobile has an active production status, while the GRID M60-1Q is end-of-life. The GRID M60-1Q’s release date is 2015-08-29, whereas the RTX 4080 Mobile was released on 2023-01-02.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every measurable specification. The process node is 5 nm for the RTX 4080 Mobile versus 28 nm for the GRID M60-1Q. Transistor count is 35,800 million versus 5,200 million. Die size is 294 mm² versus 398 mm². Transistor density is 121.8 million per mm² versus 13.1 million per mm². Base clock is 1290 MHz versus 557 MHz, boost clock is 1665 MHz versus 1178 MHz, and memory clock is 2250 MHz versus 1253 MHz.

Memory capacity is 12 GB versus 1,024 MB. Memory type is GDDR6 versus GDDR5. Bus width is 192-bit versus 256-bit, and bandwidth is 432.0 GB/s versus 160.4 GB/s. Shading units number 7,424 versus 2,048, TMUs number 232 versus 128, and ROPs number 80 versus 64. The RTX 4080 Mobile has 58 RT cores and 232 tensor cores; the GRID M60-1Q has none.

Pixel rate is 133.2 GPixel/s versus 75.39 GPixel/s, and texture rate is 386.3 GTexel/s versus 150.8 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 24.72 TFLOPS versus 4.825 TFLOPS. The RTX 4080 Mobile has FP16 at 24.72 TFLOPS; the GRID M60-1Q has no FP16 data. TDP is 110 W versus 225 W. Slot width is IGP versus dual-slot. Power connectors are none versus 1x 8-pin. The GRID M60-1Q lists a suggested PSU of 550 W; the RTX 4080 Mobile has none listed. Bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x16 versus PCIe 3.0 x16. Display outputs are portable-device dependent versus no outputs. DirectX support is 12 Ultimate (12_2) versus 12 (12_1). The GRID M60-1Q measures 267 mm in length; the RTX 4080 Mobile has no listed dimensions. Production status is active versus end-of-life. Release dates are 2023-01-02 versus 2015-08-29.

The Verdict

The data points to one conclusion: the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile is the superior GPU in every performance metric recorded. It wins the sole head-to-head benchmark by 367%, holds a higher average score, ranks higher in percentile, and offers modern features such as ray tracing cores, tensor cores, and a 5 nm process. The 24.72 TFLOPS FP32 throughput is more than five times the 4.825 TFLOPS of the GRID M60-1Q. Memory bandwidth is 432.0 GB/s versus 160.4 GB/s, and the 12 GB frame buffer dwarfs the 1,024 MB capacity of the GRID M60-1Q. For any workload involving current games, compute, or AI, the RTX 4080 Mobile is the only viable choice.

The GRID M60-1Q, however, should not be dismissed entirely. Its design targets a specific niche: server-side virtualization with no display outputs, a dual-slot form factor, and a 225 W TDP. The absence of RT and tensor cores means it is not suited for modern AI or ray tracing, but for legacy virtual desktop infrastructure where the host machine handles rendering and the GPU only assists with light 3D, it may still serve a purpose. The end-of-life status and 2015 release date, however, make it a risky choice for new deployments.

Users who need a mobile GPU for gaming, content creation, or compute should choose the RTX 4080 Mobile. Users who maintain legacy server infrastructure and require a GPU with no outputs and a specific power connector layout might consider the GRID M60-1Q, but only if their workloads are old enough to fit within its 1,024 MB memory and 4.825 TFLOPS limit. The RTX 4080 Mobile’s active production status and higher percentile ranking make it the recommended pick for virtually all scenarios. The GRID M60-1Q’s only recorded advantage is its 256-bit bus, but that wider bus cannot compensate for a 28 nm process, a 557 MHz base clock, and a 160.4 GB/s bandwidth. The verdict is unambiguous: the RTX 4080 Mobile wins on performance, efficiency, and longevity.