Qualcomm Adreno 680 vs GeForce 9800M GS

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce 9800M GS and Qualcomm Adreno 680, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

9800M GS
2008
512 MB GDDR3, 60 Watt
1.23

Qualcomm Adreno 680 outperforms 9800M GS by an impressive 73% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1085912
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency1.5823.41
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)no data
GPU code nameG94no data
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date1 November 2008 (17 years ago)6 December 2018 (6 years ago)

Detailed specifications

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

Pipelines / CUDA cores64no data
Core clock speed530 MHzno data
Number of transistors505 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology65 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)60 Watt7 Watt
Texture fill rate16.96no data
Floating-point processing power0.1696 TFLOPSno data
Gigaflops254no data
ROPs16no data
TMUs32no data
L2 Cache64 KBno data

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-E 2.0no data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16no data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data

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 typeGDDR3no data
Maximum RAM amount512 MBno data
Memory bus width256 Bitno data
Memory clock speed800 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth51.2 GB/sno data
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 outputsno data
Multi monitor support+no data
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data

Supported technologies

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

Power management8.0no data

API and SDK support

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12
Shader Model4.0no data
OpenGL2.1no data
OpenCL1.1no data
VulkanN/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.

9800M GS 1.23
Qualcomm Adreno 680 2.13
+73.2%

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.

9800M GS 516
Samples: 68
Qualcomm Adreno 680 891
+72.7%
Samples: 168

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Hogwarts Legacy 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 1−2
−500%
6−7
+500%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−200%
6−7
+200%
Fortnite 3−4
−233%
10−11
+233%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
−37.5%
10−12
+37.5%
Forza Horizon 5 1−2
−300%
4−5
+300%
Hogwarts Legacy 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
−33.3%
12−14
+33.3%
Valorant 30−35
−21.2%
40−45
+21.2%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 1−2
−500%
6−7
+500%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 27−30
−48.3%
40−45
+48.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Dota 2 16−18
−43.8%
21−24
+43.8%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−200%
6−7
+200%
Fortnite 3−4
−233%
10−11
+233%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
−37.5%
10−12
+37.5%
Forza Horizon 5 1−2
−300%
4−5
+300%
Grand Theft Auto V 0−1 4−5
Hogwarts Legacy 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
Metro Exodus 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
−33.3%
12−14
+33.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
Valorant 30−35
−21.2%
40−45
+21.2%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 1−2
−500%
6−7
+500%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Dota 2 16−18
−43.8%
21−24
+43.8%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−200%
6−7
+200%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
−37.5%
10−12
+37.5%
Hogwarts Legacy 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
−33.3%
12−14
+33.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
Valorant 30−35
−21.2%
40−45
+21.2%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 3−4
−233%
10−11
+233%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 8−9
−87.5%
14−16
+87.5%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
−61.5%
21−24
+61.5%
Valorant 4−5
−325%
16−18
+325%

1440p
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 1−2
Far Cry 5 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−66.7%
5−6
+66.7%
Hogwarts Legacy 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−7.1%
14−16
+7.1%
Valorant 6−7
−83.3%
10−12
+83.3%

4K
Ultra

Dota 2 1−2
−400%
5−6
+400%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Counter-Strike 2 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

Full HD
High

Counter-Strike 2 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

4K
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

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

  • in Battlefield 5, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Qualcomm Adreno 680 is 500% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Qualcomm Adreno 680 performs better in 48 tests (91%)
  • there's a draw in 5 tests (9%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.23 2.13
Recency 1 November 2008 6 December 2018
Chip lithography 65 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 60 Watt 7 Watt

Qualcomm Adreno 680 has a 73.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, a 828.6% more advanced lithography process, and 757.1% lower power consumption.

The Qualcomm Adreno 680 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 9800M GS in performance tests.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce 9800M GS
GeForce 9800M GS
Qualcomm Adreno 680
Adreno 680

Other comparisons

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

Community ratings

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


4.3 4 votes

Rate GeForce 9800M GS on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 43 votes

Rate Qualcomm Adreno 680 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce 9800M GS or Qualcomm Adreno 680, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.