GeForce GT 220 vs GTX 680M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
670MX 675MX 675MX Mac Edition 680M 680MX Mac Edition 775M Mac Edition 780M 780M Mac Edition 870M 880M
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
210 OEM 210 PCI 315 OEM 405 OEM 505 OEM GT 220 GT 415 OEM

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 680M with GeForce GT 220, including specs and performance data.

GTX 680M
2012, $311
4 GB GDDR5, 100 Watt
7.89
+1389%

680M outperforms GT 220 by a whopping 1389% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Share:
GTX 680M GTX 680M
GT 220 GT 220

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking5761297
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.51no data
Power efficiency6.100.71
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)
GPU code nameGK104GT216
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date4 June 2012 (14 years ago)12 October 2009 (16 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$310.50 $79.99

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

GTX 680M and GT 220 have a nearly equal value for money.

Performance to price scatter graph

Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores134448
Core clock speed719 MHz625 MHz
Boost clock speed758 MHzno data
Number of transistors3,540 million486 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)100 Watt58 Watt
Maximum GPU temperatureno data105 °C
Texture fill rate84.9010.00
Floating-point processing power2.038 TFLOPS0.1306 TFLOPS
ROPs328
TMUs11216
L1 Cache112 KBno data
L2 Cache512 KB64 KB

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Laptop sizelargeno data
Bus supportPCI Express 3.0PCI-E 2.0
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)PCIe 2.0 x16
Lengthno data168 mm
Heightno data4.376" (11.1 cm)
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone
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 typeGDDR5GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount4 GB1 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1800 MHz790 MHz
Memory bandwidth115.2 GB/s25.3 GB/s
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display ConnectorsNo outputsVGADVIHDMI
Multi monitor supportno data+
HDMI-+
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536
Audio input for HDMIno dataS/PDIF + HDA

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Optimus+-

API and SDK support

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12 API11.1 (10_1)
Shader Model5.14.1
OpenGL4.53.1
OpenCL1.11.1
Vulkan1.1.126N/A
CUDA++

Synthetic benchmarks

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score.

GTX 680M 7.89
+1389%
GT 220 0.53

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

GTX 680M 3287
+1381%
Samples: 482
GT 220 222
Samples: 2230

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:

900p67
+1575%
4−5
−1575%
Full HD64
+205%
21
−205%

Cost per frame, $

1080p4.85
−27.4%
3.81
+27.4%
  • GT 220 has 27% lower cost per frame in 1080p

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 40−45
+1950%
2−3
−1950%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+1500%
1−2
−1500%
Palworld 18−20
+533%
3−4
−533%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 14−16 0−1

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 35−40
+1650%
2−3
−1650%
Counter-Strike 2 40−45
+1950%
2−3
−1950%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+1500%
1−2
−1500%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+2400%
1−2
−2400%
Fortnite 45−50
+1500%
3−4
−1500%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+775%
4−5
−775%
Palworld 18−20
+533%
3−4
−533%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 27−30
+263%
8−9
−263%
Valorant 80−85
+200%
27−30
−200%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 35−40
+1650%
2−3
−1650%
Counter-Strike 2 40−45
+1950%
2−3
−1950%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 128
+653%
16−18
−653%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+1500%
1−2
−1500%
Dota 2 60−65
+445%
10−12
−445%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+2400%
1−2
−2400%
Fortnite 45−50
+1500%
3−4
−1500%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+775%
4−5
−775%
Grand Theft Auto V 27−30
+2800%
1−2
−2800%
Metro Exodus 16−18 0−1
Palworld 18−20
+533%
3−4
−533%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 27−30
+263%
8−9
−263%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+250%
6−7
−250%
Valorant 80−85
+200%
27−30
−200%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 35−40
+1650%
2−3
−1650%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+1500%
1−2
−1500%
Dota 2 60−65
+445%
10−12
−445%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+2400%
1−2
−2400%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+775%
4−5
−775%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 27−30
+263%
8−9
−263%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+250%
6−7
−250%
Valorant 80−85
+200%
27−30
−200%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 45−50
+1500%
3−4
−1500%
Palworld 18−20
+533%
3−4
−533%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+650%
2−3
−650%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 60−65
+2950%
2−3
−2950%
Grand Theft Auto V 9−10 0−1
Metro Exodus 8−9 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
+617%
6−7
−617%
Valorant 80−85
+1520%
5−6
−1520%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 16−18
+1600%
1−2
−1600%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7 0−1
Far Cry 5 16−18
+1500%
1−2
−1500%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+1800%
1−2
−1800%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+1000%
1−2
−1000%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 16−18 0−1
Palworld 10−12
+1000%
1−2
−1000%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 2−3 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 18−20
+20%
14−16
−20%
Metro Exodus 3−4 0−1
Palworld 4−5 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9 0−1
Valorant 35−40
+483%
6−7
−483%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 8−9 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 2−3 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3 0−1
Dota 2 27−30
+2800%
1−2
−2800%
Far Cry 5 7−8 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 12−14 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
+700%
1−2
−700%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%
Palworld 4−5 0−1

This is how GTX 680M and GT 220 compete in popular games:

  • GTX 680M is 1575% faster in 900p
  • GTX 680M is 205% faster in 1080p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the GTX 680M is 2950% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, GTX 680M surpassed GT 220 in all 32 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 7.89 0.53
Recency 4 June 2012 12 October 2009
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 1 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 100 Watt 58 Watt

GTX 680M has a 1389% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 43% more advanced lithography process.

GT 220, on the other hand, has 72% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 680M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 220 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 680M is a notebook graphics card while GeForce GT 220 is a desktop one.

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

GTX 680M GeForce GTX 680M
vs
GTX 675M SLI GeForce GTX 675M SLI
GT 220 GeForce GT 220
vs
9500 GS GeForce 9500 GS
GTX 680M GeForce GTX 680M
vs
GT 755M SLI GeForce GT 755M SLI
R9 M290X AMD R9 M290X
vs
RX 5300 XT OEM 5300 XT OEM
HD 8970M AMD HD 8970M
vs
R9 M275 M275
HD 8970M AMD HD 8970M
vs
HD 7950 Monica BIOS 2 7950 Monica BIOS 2
GTX 680M NVIDIA GTX 680M
vs
R5 M230 M230
GTX 680M NVIDIA GTX 680M
vs
8800M GTX SLI 8800M GTX SLI
GTX 680M NVIDIA GTX 680M
vs
HD 6970M Mac Edition 6970M Mac Edition
GTX 680M NVIDIA GTX 680M
vs
UHD Graphics 64EU 64EU
GTX 775M NVIDIA GTX 775M
vs
R9 M265X M265X
GTX 775M NVIDIA GTX 775M
vs
ATI HD 4870 Mac Edition 4870 Mac Edition
GTX 775M NVIDIA GTX 775M
vs
Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs G7 80EUs

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.

3.3 69 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 680M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 879 votes

Rate GeForce GT 220 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GTX 680M or GeForce GT 220, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.