
GeForce GTX 980 vs RTX A1000

GeForce GTX 980
Popular choices:

RTX A1000
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Per Dollar RTX A1000
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The RTX A1000 is significantly newer (2024 vs 2014). The RTX A1000 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The GeForce GTX 980 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce GTX 980 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.4% higher G3D Mark score. However, the RTX A1000 offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 980 | RTX A1000 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+2.4%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.4%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)) | 🔮Strong Longevity (Ampere (2020−2025) / 8nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | ✨ DLSS 2 Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | 🎮 High Capacity (8 GB) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | Standard Size (267mm) | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce GTX 980 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $50 versus $500 for the RTX A1000, it costs 90% less. While it maintains competitive performance, this results in a 924.3% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 980 | RTX A1000 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+924.3%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($50) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($500) |
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 980 and RTX A1000

GeForce GTX 980
The GeForce GTX 980 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in September 19 2014. It features the Maxwell 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1064 MHz to 1216 MHz. It has 2048 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 220W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 11,077 points. Launch price was $549.

RTX A1000
The RTX A1000 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in April 16 2024. It features the Ampere architecture. The core clock ranges from 727 MHz to 1462 MHz. It has 2304 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 8 nm process technology. It features 18 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 10,814 points.
Graphics Performance
The GeForce GTX 980 scores 11,077 and the RTX A1000 reaches 10,814 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.4% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 980 is built on Maxwell 2.0 while the RTX A1000 uses Ampere, both on 28 nm vs 8 nm. Shader units: 2,048 (GeForce GTX 980) vs 2,304 (RTX A1000). Raw compute: 4.981 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 980) vs 6.737 TFLOPS (RTX A1000). Boost clocks: 1216 MHz vs 1462 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 980 | RTX A1000 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 11,077+2% | 10,814 |
| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | Ampere |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 8 nm |
| Shading Units | 2048 | 2304+13% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 4.981 TFLOPS | 6.737 TFLOPS+35% |
| Boost Clock | 1216 MHz | 1462 MHz+20% |
| ROPs | 64+100% | 32 |
| TMUs | 128+78% | 72 |
| L1 Cache | 0.75 MB | 2.3 MB+207% |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB | 2 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce GTX 980 | RTX A1000 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 2.1 (Compatible) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | FSR 3 (Compatible) | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | NVIDIA Reflex |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GeForce GTX 980 comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the RTX A1000 has 8 GB. The RTX A1000 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 256-bit vs 128-bit.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 980 | RTX A1000 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 8 GB+100% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |
| Bus Width | 256-bit+100% | 128-bit |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB | 2 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12.1 (GeForce GTX 980) vs 12.2 (RTX A1000). Vulkan: 1.1 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.5 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 980 | RTX A1000 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12.1 | 12.2 |
| Vulkan | 1.1 | 1.3+18% |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.6+2% |
| Max Displays | 4 | 4 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 3.0 (GeForce GTX 980) vs 7th Gen NVENC (RTX A1000). Decoder: PureVideo HD VP6 vs 5th Gen NVDEC. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC (GeForce GTX 980) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 (Decode) (RTX A1000).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 980 | RTX A1000 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 3.0 | 7th Gen NVENC |
| Decoder | PureVideo HD VP6 | 5th Gen NVDEC |
| Codecs | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 (Decode) |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 980 draws 220W versus the RTX A1000's 50W — a 125.9% difference. The RTX A1000 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 500W (GeForce GTX 980) vs 500W (RTX A1000). Power connectors: 2x 6-pin vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 267mm vs 163mm, occupying 2 vs 1 slots. Typical load temperature: 80°C vs 75°C.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 980 | RTX A1000 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 220W | 50W-77% |
| Recommended PSU | 500W | 500W |
| Power Connector | 2x 6-pin | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 267mm | 163mm |
| Height | 111mm | 69mm |
| Slots | 2 | 1-50% |
| Temp (Load) | 80°C | 75°C-6% |
| Perf/Watt | 50.4 | 216.3+329% |
Value Analysis
The GeForce GTX 980 launched at $549 MSRP and currently averages $50, while the RTX A1000 launched at $749 and now averages $500. The GeForce GTX 980 costs 90% less ($450 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 221.5 (GeForce GTX 980) vs 21.6 (RTX A1000) — the GeForce GTX 980 offers 925.5% better value. The RTX A1000 is the newer GPU (2024 vs 2014).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 980 | RTX A1000 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $549-27% | $749 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $50-90% | $500 |
| Performance per Dollar | 221.5+925% | 21.6 |
| Codename | GM204 | GA107 |
| Release | September 19 2014 | April 16 2024 |
| Ranking | #245 | #251 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.















