NVIDIA
GeForce 825M vs GeForce GTX 980
Full comparison of specs, performance and benchmarks
NVIDIA
GTX 980
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce 825M and GTX 980 across specs and all relevant benchmarks.
↗GTX 980 outperforms GeForce 825M by ~23% on the catalog index; this is not a measured FPS gain.+23%
Scores are normalized on the Head to Head scale. Higher is better. How is this calculated?H2HBench Data Quality
Low confidenceSpecifications: Field verification not recordedVerified gaming results: 0Estimated / unverified results: 32Price record updated: Sep 6, 2026
Limited verified data
H2HBench Verdict
Higher catalog score: GeForce 825M (~5%)
The score difference is not a measured FPS improvement.
Reasons to consider GeForce 825M
- Lower stated power consumption
- Higher catalog value index
- Recorded feature support: OpenCL 3.0, CUDA 3.5 · Not supported
Reasons to consider GTX 980
- Higher catalog performance index
- More graphics memory
- Recorded feature support: OpenCL 3.0, CUDA 5.2 · Not supported
Catalog metrics radar
Axes with missing data are hidden; every value uses a fixed scale.
NVIDIAPerformance
Efficiency
Price / performance
Memory capacity
3037
10075
5445
4356
Graphics card ranking
Positions 167–172of 411
Which should you choose?
Two practical conclusions based on community votes and gaming value.
GeForce 825M
173 likesHead to Head visitors currently choose this model more often.
Overview
Scores are calculated from specifications, performance, and efficiency.
GamesDirectX, OpenCL, and Vulkan performance
30
37Better
Professional applications3D modeling, video editing, and rendering
28
33Better
AI and machine learningMachine-learning and AI capabilities
26
31Better
Power efficiencyPower consumption across workloads
100Better
75
Head to Head scoreOverall catalog score
42Better
40
Specifications
The better numeric value is highlighted in green, taking the metric direction into account.
Release date
HDMI
DisplayPort
Max resolution
Max monitors
USB Type-C
Recommended PSU
DirectX
Vulkan
OpenGL
TFLOPSBetter
Power consumptionBetter
Architecture
Memory type
Compute API
Launch price—
Shader units / coresBetter
Interface
Power connector
Die sizeBetter
Memory cache
Clock speedBetter
Base clockBetter
Boost clockBetter
VRAMBetter
Length
Memory frequencyBetter
Memory busBetter
Memory bandwidthBetter
Power consumptionBetter
Process node
Transistor countBetter
Thickness
Device class
Upscaling
Gaming FPS
Available results are shown separately; missing data is not treated as zero.
The Gaming FPS section compares GeForce 825M and GTX 980 across curated H2H Lab game presets. The useful signal is not only average FPS, but also how each device behaves at 1440p and 4K, how memory capacity and bus width affect heavy textures, and whether the game engine favors raster performance, ray tracing, or driver maturity.
GeForce 825MGTX 980
Verified externalEstimatedSources ↗
Counter-Strike 2
1080p High
153 FPS
185 FPS
1080p Ultra
108 FPS
130 FPS
1440p Ultra
58 FPS
72 FPS
4K Ultra
21 FPS
25 FPS
Counter-Strike 2GeForce 825M153 FPSGTX 980185 FPSGeForce 825M108 FPSGTX 980130 FPSGeForce 825M58 FPSGTX 98072 FPSGeForce 825M21 FPSGTX 98025 FPS
Cyberpunk 2077GeForce 825M99 FPSGTX 980119 FPSGeForce 825M85 FPSGTX 980103 FPSGeForce 825M42 FPSGTX 98053 FPSGeForce 825M14 FPSGTX 98017 FPS
Forza Horizon 5GeForce 825M125 FPSGTX 980150 FPSGeForce 825M81 FPSGTX 98097 FPSGeForce 825M52 FPSGTX 98065 FPSGeForce 825M31 FPSGTX 98036 FPS
Hogwarts LegacyGeForce 825M81 FPSGTX 98097 FPSGeForce 825M68 FPSGTX 98081 FPSGeForce 825M37 FPSGTX 98047 FPSGeForce 825M14 FPSGTX 98017 FPS
H2H workload indices
Comparable internal indices on a fixed 0–100 scale.
H2H Raster IndexH2H Index / 100303721%
H2H Compute IndexH2H Index / 100324022%
H2H Rendering IndexH2H Index / 100344221%
H2H Memory Workload IndexH2H Index / 100435626%
H2H Efficiency IndexH2H Index / 1001007529%
These are versioned H2H calculated indices derived from normalized catalog data. They are not results from a third-party benchmark.
H2H AI workload indices
Estimated workload profiles based on available performance and memory data.
H2H Image Generation IndexH2H Index / 100364522%
H2H ML Training IndexH2H Index / 100354423%
H2H Inference IndexH2H Index / 100344221%
H2H Local LLM IndexH2H Index / 100374724%
H2H Computer Vision IndexH2H Index / 100344323%
These are versioned H2H calculated indices derived from normalized catalog data. They are not results from a third-party benchmark.
Graphics APIs, SDKs and upscaling
DirectX11.012.1
Vulkan1.21.4
OpenGL4.64.6
UpscalingNot supportedNot supported
Compute APIOpenCL 3.0, CUDA 3.5OpenCL 3.0, CUDA 5.2
Architecture and release
ArchitectureKepler / MaxwellMaxwell 2.0
Process node28 nm28 nm
Release date20142014
Device classMobileDesktop
GPU cores, die and clocks
Transistor count1020 million5200 millionBetter
Die size87 mm²Better398 mm²
Shader units / cores3842048Better
Base clock850 MHz1126 MHzBetter
Boost clock941 MHz1216 MHzBetter
Board size, power and compatibility
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x8PCIe 3x16
LengthOEM dependent267 mm
ThicknessIGPDual-slot
Recommended PSUOEM dependent450 W
Power connectorNone6+6 pin
Display outputs and limits
HDMIOEM dependentHDMI 2.0
DisplayPortOEM dependentDisplayPort 1.2
USB Type-COEM dependentNo
Max monitorsOEM dependent5
Max resolutionDepends on host system7680 × 4320
Memory and compute throughput
VRAM1 GB DDR34 GB GDDR5Better
Memory typeGDDR5 / DDR3GDDR5
Memory bus64 bit256 bitBetter
TFLOPS0.7234.981Better
Other comparisons
Reviews and questions
Explain this comparison
Beyond percentages: causes, relevant specifications, and practical impact behind every chart.
What AI will explain
Overall score, radar, FPS, synthetic tests, specifications, efficiency, and value.
Evidence details
Data coverage
- Verified gaming results
- 0
- Verified synthetic results
- 0
- Games with verified results
- 0
- Verified community results
- 0
- Estimated / unverified results
- 32
- Specifications
- 0 / 69
Calculated scores · How is this calculated?
Scores use the catalog model and may include estimated inputs. Open each score to see its origin and the methodology.
clamp(round(performance × 0.7 + (efficiency ?? 50) × 0.2 + (value is missing ? 0 : (value − 50) × 0.2)), 0, 100)Price evidence · View sources (3)
Verified community results
No verified community benchmarks yet.
Reviewed by
No individual editorial review is recorded for this comparison.
Comparison history
Show recorded changes (4)
- · Record updated: products
- · Record changed: product_prices
- · Record updated: products
- · Record updated: products
Why you can trust this comparison
Origin and confidence are evaluated from the evidence attached to each value. Unverified results are identified, and specification, benchmark and price dates remain separate.
Owner experiences
Real builds, results, and community feedback.
Moderator reviewedHelpful to the communityExpert badges
Frequently asked comparison questions
Short recommendations based on performance, memory, power consumption, and intended use.
01Which is better for gaming: GeForce 825M or GTX 980?+
GeForce 825M has the higher overall gaming score, while GeForce 825M offers the better price-to-performance ratio. The final choice depends on resolution and settings.
02Which is better for streaming?+
GeForce 825M is the stronger streaming choice thanks to performance, hardware encoding, and application support. Check AV1, H.264, and HEVC support before buying.
03Which is better for Blender?+
GeForce 825M is generally the better option for Blender and GPU rendering. Rendering-engine support and available VRAM also matter.
04Which is better for video editing?+
GeForce 825M offers more overall performance, while GeForce 825M offers more memory headroom. Codecs, hardware encoders, and editor optimization can change the result.
05Which is better for neural networks and AI?+
GeForce 825M is the more practical option for local AI workloads. VRAM capacity, compute libraries, and framework compatibility are especially important.
06Which is better for 1080p?+
GeForce 825M is the most rational 1080p choice, where high frame rates and cost per frame matter most.
07Which is better for 1440p?+
GeForce 825M leads in combined 1440p performance. GeForce 825M can be preferable for heavy textures and games with high VRAM usage.
08Which is better for 4K?+
GeForce 825M is preferable for 4K, where total performance, memory bandwidth, and VRAM capacity have the greatest impact.
09Which is better for a quiet PC?+
GeForce 825M is easier to use in a quiet build because of its lower estimated power and thermal load. Actual noise depends on the specific cooler.
10Which is better without replacing the power supply?+
GeForce 825M is the safer candidate because its stated power consumption is lower. Verify PSU wattage, age, and power connectors.
11Is it worth upgrading from the previous generation?+
Consider upgrading to GeForce 825M if your current device no longer delivers the required FPS, memory capacity, or feature support. A gain below 15–20% is usually worth waiting for a price cut.