GeForce GTX 680M SLI vs 965M SLI
Aggregate performance score
965M SLI outperforms 680M SLI by a minimal 4% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in performance ranking | 293 | 302 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 31.36 | 28.69 |
| Architecture | Maxwell (2014−2018) | Kepler (2012−2018) |
| GPU code name | no data | N13E-GTX |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 5 January 2015 (9 years ago) | 4 June 2012 (11 years ago) |
| Current price | $149 | $149 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
GTX 965M SLI has 9% better value for money than GTX 680M SLI.
Detailed specifications
General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 2048 | 2688 |
| Core clock speed | 924 MHz | 720 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 950 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | 2x 5200 Million | no data |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
Form factor & compatibility
Information on GeForce GTX 965M SLI and GeForce GTX 680M SLI compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.
| Laptop size | large | large |
| SLI options | + | + |
VRAM capacity and type
Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2x 4 GB | 2x 4 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 2x 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 5000 MHz | 3600 MHz |
| Shared memory | - | - |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| Optimus | + | + |
API compatibility
List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12_1 | 11 |
| CUDA | + | + |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark performance score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.
965M SLI outperforms 680M SLI by 4% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
3DMark 11 Performance GPU
3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.
Benchmark coverage: 17%
965M SLI outperforms 680M SLI by 32% in 3DMark 11 Performance GPU.
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Average FPS across all PC games
Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:
| 900p | 130−140
−2.3%
| 133
+2.3%
|
| Full HD | 72
−36.1%
| 98
+36.1%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 27−30
+3.8%
|
24−27
−3.8%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 35−40
+5.9%
|
30−35
−5.9%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 30−33
+7.1%
|
27−30
−7.1%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 55−60
+5.4%
|
55−60
−5.4%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 45−50
+4.7%
|
40−45
−4.7%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 27−30
+3.8%
|
24−27
−3.8%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 45−50
+4.7%
|
40−45
−4.7%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 45−50
+4.4%
|
45−50
−4.4%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 60−65
+3.4%
|
55−60
−3.4%
|
| Hitman 3 | 45−50
+6.5%
|
45−50
−6.5%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 35−40
+2.9%
|
35−40
−2.9%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 27−30
+7.4%
|
27−30
−7.4%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 35−40
+5.7%
|
35−40
−5.7%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 30−35
+6.5%
|
30−35
−6.5%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 35−40
+5.9%
|
30−35
−5.9%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 30−33
+7.1%
|
27−30
−7.1%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 55−60
+5.4%
|
55−60
−5.4%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 45−50
+4.7%
|
40−45
−4.7%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 27−30
+3.8%
|
24−27
−3.8%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 45−50
+4.7%
|
40−45
−4.7%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 45−50
+4.4%
|
45−50
−4.4%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 60−65
+3.4%
|
55−60
−3.4%
|
| Hitman 3 | 45−50
+6.5%
|
45−50
−6.5%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 35−40
+2.9%
|
35−40
−2.9%
|
| Metro Exodus | 27−30
+3.8%
|
24−27
−3.8%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 27−30
+7.4%
|
27−30
−7.4%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 35−40
+5.7%
|
35−40
−5.7%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 35−40
+5.7%
|
35−40
−5.7%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 30−35
+6.5%
|
30−35
−6.5%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 35−40
+5.9%
|
30−35
−5.9%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 30−33
+7.1%
|
27−30
−7.1%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 55−60
+5.4%
|
55−60
−5.4%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 27−30
+3.8%
|
24−27
−3.8%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 45−50
+4.7%
|
40−45
−4.7%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 45−50
+4.4%
|
45−50
−4.4%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 60−65
+3.4%
|
55−60
−3.4%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 35−40
+5.7%
|
35−40
−5.7%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 30−35
+6.5%
|
30−35
−6.5%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 24−27
+4.2%
|
24−27
−4.2%
|
| Hitman 3 | 27−30
+3.8%
|
24−27
−3.8%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 21−24
+4.5%
|
21−24
−4.5%
|
| Metro Exodus | 16−18
+6.7%
|
14−16
−6.7%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 12−14
+8.3%
|
12−14
−8.3%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 21−24
+4.8%
|
21−24
−4.8%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 18−20
+5.9%
|
16−18
−5.9%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 14−16
+7.1%
|
14−16
−7.1%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 35−40
+2.8%
|
35−40
−2.8%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−11
+11.1%
|
9−10
−11.1%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 27−30
+7.4%
|
27−30
−7.4%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 30−35
+6.5%
|
30−35
−6.5%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 30−35
+3%
|
30−35
−3%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 18−20
+5.6%
|
18−20
−5.6%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 10−12
+0%
|
10−12
+0%
|
4K
High Preset
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 12−14
+0%
|
12−14
+0%
|
| Hitman 3 | 16−18
+6.7%
|
14−16
−6.7%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 10−12
+0%
|
10−12
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 10−12
+10%
|
10−11
−10%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 16−18
+6.3%
|
16−18
−6.3%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 18−20
+5.6%
|
18−20
−5.6%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 14−16
+7.7%
|
12−14
−7.7%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 16−18
+6.3%
|
16−18
−6.3%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 24−27
+4.3%
|
21−24
−4.3%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
This is how GTX 965M SLI and GTX 680M SLI compete in popular games:
- GTX 680M SLI is 2% faster in 900p
- GTX 680M SLI is 36% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Cyberpunk 2077, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GTX 965M SLI is 11% faster than the GTX 680M SLI.
All in all, in popular games:
- GTX 965M SLI is ahead in 59 tests (87%)
- there's a draw in 9 tests (13%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 17.27 | 16.53 |
| Recency | 5 January 2015 | 4 June 2012 |
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between GeForce GTX 965M SLI and GeForce GTX 680M SLI.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Comparisons with similar GPUs
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
