NVIDIA GeForce 9800M GTS vs NVIDIA GeForce 9800M GTX

NVIDIA GeForce 9800M GTS

► remove NVIDIA GeForce 9800M GTS

The Nvidia GeForce 9800M GTS is a graphics adapter for laptops and is based on the G94 core with 64 shader processors. The chip is produced in 65nm (512 MB) and later in 55nm (1024 MB versions). Therefore, the power consumption between both boards are similar at about 75 watts each. Note that the 55nm version of the 9800M GTS was later renamed to the GeForce GTS 160M.

Because of the additional shaders and higher clock speeds, the 9800M GTS is noticeably faster than the 9700M GTS (see benchmarks below). Therefore, DirectX 10 games of 2008 should all be playable in medium to high detail settings.

As with all DirectX 10 cards, the GeForce 9800M GTS renders 3D images using "Unified Shaders". Dedicated pixel- and vertex shaders are completely replaced with 64 so called Stream Processors, which now take over most of the graphics workload. Furthermore, these shader units are clocked higher than the core GPU itself.

An advantage of the GeForce 9000 series is the integrated PureVideo HD video processor. The GPU is able to assist the CPU in the decoding of H.264-, VC-1-, MPEG2- and WMV9 video formats throughout a wide range of resolutions.

In conjunction with the Nvidia 9100M G integrated graphics, the 9800M GTS supports Hybrid-SLI (only HybridPower). HybridPower is a Windows Vista-only technique for switching between integrated and discrete graphics for power-saving purposes. The technology was eventually supplanted by a more automatic and optimized system, called Optimus. GeForceBoost is not supported with this card as there would be no performance gain from combining the discrete 9800M GTS with the integrated GPU.

Compared to desktop graphics cards, the 9800M GTS should be a bit slower than the GeForce 8800 GS, the latter of which has a higher memory clock rate.

NVIDIA GeForce 9800M GTX

► remove NVIDIA GeForce 9800M GTX

The Nvidia GeForce 9800M GTX is a graphics adapter for laptops based on the G92 core. In general, the GPU is similar to that of the 8800M GTX but with 112 unified shader cores instead of 96. The chip is manufactured in a 65nm process and because of the high shader count, the power consumption (75 Watt of the MXM board) can be quite high. As a result, the 9800M GTX is only found in larger laptops with relatively powerful cooling solutions.

The performance of the chip is noticeably better than both the 9800M GT and GTS because of the additional shader units (see benchmarks below). Therefore, DirectX 10 games of 2008 should all be playable in high details.

As with all cards with DirectX 10 capabilities, the GeForce 9800M GTX renders 3D images using "Unified Shaders". Dedicated pixel- and vertex shaders have been dropped in favor of stream processors, which have now taken up much of the rendering burden. Furthermore, the shader units are higher clocked than the core chip itself at 1250 MHz.

A feature found in the GeForce 9000 series is the integrated PureVideo HD video processor. The GPU is able to assist the CPU in the decoding of H.264-, VC-1-, MPEG2- and WMV9 video material.

In conjunction with the Nvidia 9100M G integrated graphics, the 9800M GTX supports Hybrid-SLI known as HybridPower. HybridPower is a technique available only in Windows Vista that allows users to choose between the integrated or dedicated graphics core for power-saving purposes. Eventually, graphics switching was seamlessly accomplished through drivers by Nvidia, a technology now known as Optimus. GeForceBoost is not supported with the 9800M GTX as there would be no performance gain when paired the integrated GPU.

Compared to desktop graphics cards, the 9800M GTX should be a bit slower than the GeForce 8800 GT, which has a higher memory clock rate.

The 9800M GTX was eventually succeeded by the GTX 260M. The latter is based off of the G92b core architecture and is produced in a 55nm fabrication process, leading to lower energy demands and heat dissipation.

NVIDIA GeForce 9800M GTSNVIDIA GeForce 9800M GTX
ManufacturerNVIDIANVIDIA
GeForce 9800M Series
GeForce 9800M GT SLI (compare) 192 @ 500 MHz256 Bit @ 800 MHz
GeForce 9800M GTS SLI (compare) 128 @ 600 MHz256 Bit @ 800 MHz
GeForce 9800M GTX 112 @ 500 MHz256 Bit @ 800 MHz
GeForce 9800M GT (compare) 96 @ 500 MHz256 Bit @ 800 MHz
GeForce 9800M GTS 64 @ 600 MHz256 Bit @ 800 MHz
GeForce 9800M GS (compare) 64 @ 530 MHz256 Bit @ 800 MHz
GeForce 9800M GT SLI (compare) 192 @ 500 MHz256 Bit @ 800 MHz
GeForce 9800M GTS SLI (compare) 128 @ 600 MHz256 Bit @ 800 MHz
GeForce 9800M GTX 112 @ 500 MHz256 Bit @ 800 MHz
GeForce 9800M GT (compare) 96 @ 500 MHz256 Bit @ 800 MHz
GeForce 9800M GTS 64 @ 600 MHz256 Bit @ 800 MHz
GeForce 9800M GS (compare) 64 @ 530 MHz256 Bit @ 800 MHz
CodenameNB9E-GTNB9E-GTX
ArchitectureG9xG9x
64 - 112 -
Core600 MHz500 MHz
Shader1500 MHz1250 MHz
Memory800 MHz800 MHz
Bus256 Bit256 Bit
MemoryGDDR3GDDR3
Max. Memory1024 MB1024 MB
nono
DirectXDirectX 10, 4.0DirectX 10, 4.0
Transistors504 Million754 Million
Technology55 / 65 nm65 nm
FeaturesPureVideo HD, HybridPower, HybridPower, PureVideo HD, CUDA, PhysX ready
Size
Introduced15.07.2008 15.07.2008
MXM 3MXM 3
Manufacturerhttp://www.nvidia.com/object/geforce_980...http://www.nvidia.com/object/geforce_980...

3DMark Vantage
P Result 1280x1024 + NVIDIA GeForce 9800M GTS
P Result 1280x1024 + NVIDIA GeForce 9800M GTX
P GPU no PhysX 1280x1024 + NVIDIA GeForce 9800M GTS
P GPU no PhysX 1280x1024 + NVIDIA GeForce 9800M GTX
3DMark 2001SE - Standard 1024x768
36940 Points (38%)
min: 32624     avg: 37419     median: 35460 (37%)     max: 44174 Points
3DMark 03 - Standard 1024x768
min: 29179     avg: 29830     median: 29829.5 (16%)     max: 30480 Points
min: 30864     avg: 31959     median: 31601 (17%)     max: 33411 Points
3DMark 05 - Standard 1024x768
16430 Points (31%)
min: 13912     avg: 16638     median: 16720.5 (31%)     max: 19197 Points
3DMark 06 + NVIDIA GeForce 9800M GTS
Standard 1280x1024 + NVIDIA GeForce 9800M GTX
Cinebench R10 Shading 32Bit + NVIDIA GeForce 9800M GTX

Average Benchmarks NVIDIA GeForce 9800M GTS → 100%

Average Benchmarks NVIDIA GeForce 9800M GTX → 106%

-
-
* Smaller numbers mean a higher performance
1 This benchmark is not used for the average calculation

Crysis Warhead

Crysis Warhead

2008
low 800x600
GeForce 9800M GTX:
77  fps
ultra 1024x768
GeForce 9800M GTX:
15  fps
GeForce 9800M GTX:
»
Supreme Commander - FA Bench

Supreme Commander - FA Bench

2007
high 1024x768
GeForce 9800M GTX:
36  fps
GeForce 9800M GTX:
»
Crysis - GPU Benchmark

Crysis - GPU Benchmark

2007
low 1024x768
100%
GeForce 9800M GTS:
92  fps
118%
GeForce 9800M GTX:
85.6 91 114.5 143 ~ 109 fps
med. 1024x768
100%
GeForce 9800M GTS:
52  fps
129%
GeForce 9800M GTX:
55 58.2 64.2 92 ~ 67 fps
high 1024x768
100%
GeForce 9800M GTS:
33  fps
124%
GeForce 9800M GTX:
35.9 38.1 40.2 49.6 ~ 41 fps
GeForce 9800M GTS:
»
GeForce 9800M GTX:
»
Crysis - CPU Benchmark

Crysis - CPU Benchmark

2007
low 1024x768
GeForce 9800M GTX:
111.5 119 125.6 ~ 119 fps
med. 1024x768
GeForce 9800M GTX:
56.6 58.4 62.8 ~ 59 fps
high 1024x768
GeForce 9800M GTX:
35.8 37.4 37.6 ~ 37 fps
GeForce 9800M GTX:
»
Call of Juarez Benchmark

Call of Juarez Benchmark

2006
high 1024x768
GeForce 9800M GTX:
24 28 ~ 26 fps
GeForce 9800M GTX:
»
The Elder Scrolls IV - Oblivion

The Elder Scrolls IV - Oblivion

2006
high 1280x800
GeForce 9800M GTX:
77  fps
GeForce 9800M GTX:
»
Half Life 2 - Lost Coast Benchmark

Half Life 2 - Lost Coast Benchmark

2005
high 1024x768
GeForce 9800M GTX:
210  fps
GeForce 9800M GTX:
»
Doom 3

Doom 3

2004
low 640x480
GeForce 9800M GTX:
244.1  fps
med. 640x480
GeForce 9800M GTX:
240.6  fps
high 800x600
GeForce 9800M GTX:
249.4  fps
ultra 1024x768
GeForce 9800M GTX:
224.2  fps
GeForce 9800M GTX:
»

Average Gaming NVIDIA GeForce 9800M GTS → 100%

Average Gaming NVIDIA GeForce 9800M GTX → 124%

Add one or more devices and compare

In the following list you can select (and also search for) devices that should be added to the comparison. You can select more than one device.

restrict list:

show all (including archived), 2020, 2019
v1.11
Please share our article, every link counts!
> Notebook / Laptop Reviews and News > Benchmarks / Tech > Graphics Card Comparison - Head 2 Head
Redaktion, 2017-09- 8 (Update: 2017-09-11)