Radeon 680M vs GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
GT 545 GT 545 OEM GT 640 OEM Rebrand GTS 450 Rev. 2 GTS 450 Rev. 3 GTX 550 Ti
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
610 610M 620 625 630 660M 680M

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2 with Radeon 680M, including specs and performance data.

GTS 450 Rev. 2
2011
1 GB GDDR5, 106 Watt
4.05

680M outperforms GTS 450 Rev. 2 by a whopping 138% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Share:
GTS 450 Rev. 2 GTS 450 Rev. 2
Radeon 680M Radeon 680M

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking747506
Place by popularitynot in top-10091
Power efficiency2.9314.82
ArchitectureFermi 2.0 (2010−2014)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025)
GPU code nameGF116Rembrandt+
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date15 March 2011 (15 years ago)3 January 2023 (3 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. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores192768
Core clock speed783 MHz2000 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2200 MHz
Number of transistors1,170 million13,100 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)106 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate25.06105.6
Floating-point processing power0.6013 TFLOPS3.379 TFLOPS
ROPs1632
TMUs3248
Ray Tracing Coresno data12
L0 Cacheno data192 KB
L1 Cache256 KB256 KB
L2 Cache256 KB2 MB
L3 Cacheno data8 MB

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).

InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x8
Length210 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pinNone

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 typeGDDR5System Shared
Maximum RAM amount1 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width128 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed902 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth57.73 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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMIPortable Device Dependent
HDMI+-

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.16.7
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.12.0
VulkanN/A1.3
CUDA2.1-

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 HD14−16
−164%
37
+164%
1440p7−8
−143%
17
+143%
4K4−5
−150%
10
+150%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 38
+0%
38
+0%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 32
+0%
32
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 28
+0%
28
+0%
Far Cry 5 38
+0%
38
+0%
Fortnite 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 52
+0%
52
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Valorant 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 21
+0%
21
+0%
Dota 2 71
+0%
71
+0%
Far Cry 5 35
+0%
35
+0%
Fortnite 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 46
+0%
46
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 36
+0%
36
+0%
Metro Exodus 23
+0%
23
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 40
+0%
40
+0%
Valorant 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 18
+0%
18
+0%
Dota 2 61
+0%
61
+0%
Far Cry 5 33
+0%
33
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24
+0%
24
+0%
Valorant 146
+0%
146
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 17
+0%
17
+0%
Metro Exodus 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Valorant 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10
+0%
10
+0%
Far Cry 5 21
+0%
21
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 17
+0%
17
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Metro Exodus 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 13
+0%
13
+0%
Valorant 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4
+0%
4
+0%
Dota 2 18
+0%
18
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

This is how GTS 450 Rev. 2 and Radeon 680M compete in popular games:

  • Radeon 680M is 164% faster in 1080p
  • Radeon 680M is 143% faster in 1440p
  • Radeon 680M is 150% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 60 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 4.05 9.65
Recency 15 March 2011 3 January 2023
Chip lithography 40 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 106 Watt 50 Watt

Radeon 680M has a 138% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, a 567% more advanced lithography process, and 112% lower power consumption.

The Radeon 680M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2 is a desktop graphics card while Radeon 680M is a notebook one.

Other comparisons

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

GTS 450 Rev. 2 GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2
vs
HD 7750 Radeon HD 7750
Radeon 680M Radeon 680M
vs
Iris Xe Graphics G7 Iris Xe Graphics G7
GTS 450 Rev. 2 GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2
vs
ATI HD 5770 Radeon HD 5770
GTX 680 Mac Edition NVIDIA GTX 680 Mac Edition
vs
GT 610 PCI 610 PCI
RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) AMD RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000)
vs
GTX 560 SE 560 SE
R7 450 OEM AMD R7 450 OEM
vs
GTX 560 560
RX 5800 XT AMD RX 5800 XT
vs
GTX 560 560
Steam Deck GPU AMD Deck GPU
vs
GT 520 520
UHD Graphics G4 Intel Graphics G4
vs
9300 GS Rev. 2 9300 GS Rev. 2
ATI V4800 FirePro V4800
vs
GT 440 440
RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile
vs
GTX 1060 6 GB 9Gbps 1060 6 GB 9Gbps
UHD Graphics UHD Graphics
vs
Playstation 4 Pro GPU GPU
Instinct MI300X AMD Instinct MI300X
vs
Xbox One S GPU S GPU

Community ratings

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

3.2 46 votes

Rate GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2 1245 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2 or Radeon 680M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.