Radeon 680M vs GeForce GTS 150M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTS 150M and Radeon 680M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTS 150M
2009
1 GB GDDR3, 45 Watt
1.31

680M outperforms GTS 150M by a whopping 1121% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1028336
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency2.0322.29
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code nameG94Rembrandt+
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date3 March 2009 (15 years ago)3 January 2023 (1 year 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 cores64768
Core clock speed400 MHz2000 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2200 MHz
Number of transistors505 million13,100 million
Manufacturing process technology65 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)45 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate12.80105.6
Floating-point processing power0.128 TFLOPS3.379 TFLOPS
Gigaflops192no data
ROPs1632
TMUs3248
Ray Tracing Coresno data12

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 x16PCIe 4.0 x8
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone
SLI options2-way-
MXM TypeMXM 3.0 Type-Bno 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 typeGDDR3System Shared
Maximum RAM amount1 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width256 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speedUp to 800 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth51 GB/sno data
Shared memory-+

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display ConnectorsDisplayPortHDMIDual Link DVILVDSSingle Link DVIVGAPortable Device Dependent
HDMI+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIS/PDIFno 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 compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model4.06.7
OpenGL2.14.6
OpenCL1.12.0
VulkanN/A1.3
CUDA+-

Synthetic benchmark performance

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. 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.

GTS 150M 1.31
Radeon 680M 15.99
+1121%

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.

GTS 150M 504
Radeon 680M 6166
+1123%

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:

Full HD3−4
−1133%
37
+1133%
1440p1−2
−1600%
17
+1600%
4K0−111

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−875%
39
+875%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
−550%
35−40
+550%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−775%
35−40
+775%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−625%
29
+625%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−4000%
40−45
+4000%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
−1467%
45−50
+1467%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
−5400%
110−120
+5400%
Hitman 3 6−7
−433%
32
+433%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
−514%
85−90
+514%
Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−2250%
45−50
+2250%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
−613%
55−60
+613%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−158%
85−90
+158%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
−550%
35−40
+550%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−775%
35−40
+775%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−425%
21
+425%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−4000%
40−45
+4000%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
−1467%
45−50
+1467%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
−5400%
110−120
+5400%
Hitman 3 6−7
−400%
30
+400%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
−514%
85−90
+514%
Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−2250%
45−50
+2250%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
−488%
47
+488%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
−264%
40−45
+264%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−158%
85−90
+158%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
−550%
35−40
+550%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−775%
35−40
+775%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−325%
17
+325%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−4000%
40−45
+4000%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
−5400%
110−120
+5400%
Hitman 3 6−7
−350%
27
+350%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
−207%
43
+207%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
−400%
40
+400%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
−118%
24
+118%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+83.3%
18
−83.3%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−2250%
45−50
+2250%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
−3200%
30−35
+3200%
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
−1250%
27−30
+1250%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−1700%
18−20
+1700%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 18−20
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−1000%
11
+1000%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−1900%
20−22
+1900%
Hitman 3 7−8
−186%
20−22
+186%
Horizon Zero Dawn 5−6
−600%
35−40
+600%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
−1600%
17
+1600%
Watch Dogs: Legion 6−7
−1650%
100−110
+1650%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−625%
27−30
+625%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 0−1 12−14

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−900%
10−11
+900%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
−700%
8−9
+700%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 9−10
Far Cry 5 0−1 9−10

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−400%
14−16
+400%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 38
+0%
38
+0%
Battlefield 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Metro Exodus 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 31
+0%
31
+0%
Battlefield 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Metro Exodus 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 27
+0%
27
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Metro Exodus 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27
+0%
27
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Hitman 3 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Metro Exodus 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 13
+0%
13
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 4
+0%
4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 14
+0%
14
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

This is how GTS 150M and Radeon 680M compete in popular games:

  • Radeon 680M is 1133% faster in 1080p
  • Radeon 680M is 1600% faster in 1440p

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

  • in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GTS 150M is 83% faster.
  • in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Radeon 680M is 5400% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GTS 150M is ahead in 1 test (1%)
  • Radeon 680M is ahead in 47 tests (69%)
  • there's a draw in 20 tests (29%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.31 15.99
Recency 3 March 2009 3 January 2023
Chip lithography 65 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 45 Watt 50 Watt

GTS 150M has 11.1% lower power consumption.

Radeon 680M, on the other hand, has a 1120.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 13 years, and a 983.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon 680M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTS 150M in performance tests.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

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 GTS 150M
GeForce GTS 150M
AMD Radeon 680M
Radeon 680M

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


3 2 votes

Rate GeForce GTS 150M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2 936 votes

Rate Radeon 680M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.