Qualcomm Adreno 680 vs GeForce GTX 560 Ti

Place in performance ranking	487	766
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	1.82	no data
Architecture	Fermi (2010−2014)	no data
GPU code name	GF114	no data
Market segment	Desktop	Laptop
Release date	25 January 2011 (13 years ago)	6 December 2018 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$249	no data
Current price	$130 (0.5x MSRP)	no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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	384	no data
Core clock speed	822 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	1,950 million	no data
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	170 Watt	7 Watt
Texture fill rate	52.67	no data
Floating-point performance	1,263.4 gflops	no data

Form factor & compatibility

Information on GeForce GTX 560 Ti and Qualcomm Adreno 680 compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). 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.

Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	no data
Length	229 mm	no data
Width	2-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	2x 6-pin	no 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 type	GDDR5	no data
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	no data
Memory bus width	256 Bit	no data
Memory clock speed	2004 MHz	no data
Memory bandwidth	128.3 GB/s	no data
Shared memory	no data	+

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 Connectors	2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI	no data
HDMI	+	no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_0)	12
Shader Model	5.1	no data
OpenGL	4.6	no data
OpenCL	1.1	no data
Vulkan	N/A	no data
CUDA	2.1	no data

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.

GTX 560 Ti 7.88
+187%

Qualcomm Adreno 680 2.75

GeForce GTX 560 Ti outperforms Qualcomm Adreno 680 by 187% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

GTX 560 Ti 3042
+300%

Qualcomm Adreno 680 761

GeForce GTX 560 Ti outperforms Qualcomm Adreno 680 by 300% in Passmark.

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%

GTX 560 Ti 4013
+107%

Qualcomm Adreno 680 1936

GeForce GTX 560 Ti outperforms Qualcomm Adreno 680 by 107% 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	63 +200%	21−24 −200%
Full HD	59 +228%	18−21 −228%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

14−16

+180%

5−6
−180%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	14−16 +180%	5−6 −180%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	27−30 +170%	10−11 −170%
Battlefield 5	10−11 +150%	4−5 −150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	18−20 +157%	7−8 −157%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 +180%	5−6 −180%
Far Cry 5	14−16 +180%	5−6 −180%
Far Cry New Dawn	18−20 +157%	7−8 −157%
Forza Horizon 4	30−33 +173%	10−12 −173%
Hitman 3	16−18 +167%	6−7 −167%
Horizon Zero Dawn	50−55 +178%	18−20 −178%
Metro Exodus	60−65 +173%	21−24 −173%
Red Dead Redemption 2	16−18 +167%	6−7 −167%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	30−33 +150%	12−14 −150%
Watch Dogs: Legion	45−50 +181%	16−18 −181%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	14−16 +180%	5−6 −180%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	27−30 +170%	10−11 −170%
Battlefield 5	10−11 +150%	4−5 −150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	18−20 +157%	7−8 −157%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 +180%	5−6 −180%
Far Cry 5	14−16 +180%	5−6 −180%
Far Cry New Dawn	18−20 +157%	7−8 −157%
Forza Horizon 4	30−33 +173%	10−12 −173%
Hitman 3	16−18 +167%	6−7 −167%
Horizon Zero Dawn	50−55 +178%	18−20 −178%
Metro Exodus	60−65 +173%	21−24 −173%
Red Dead Redemption 2	16−18 +167%	6−7 −167%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	30−33 +150%	12−14 −150%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	18−20 +157%	7−8 −157%
Watch Dogs: Legion	45−50 +181%	16−18 −181%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	14−16 +180%	5−6 −180%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	27−30 +170%	10−11 −170%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	18−20 +157%	7−8 −157%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 +180%	5−6 −180%
Far Cry 5	14−16 +180%	5−6 −180%
Forza Horizon 4	30−33 +173%	10−12 −173%
Horizon Zero Dawn	50−55 +178%	18−20 −178%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	30−33 +150%	12−14 −150%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	18−20 +157%	7−8 −157%
Watch Dogs: Legion	45−50 +181%	16−18 −181%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

16−18

+167%

6−7
−167%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	14−16 +180%	5−6 −180%
Far Cry New Dawn	8−9 +167%	3−4 −167%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	8−9 +167%	3−4 −167%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	14−16 +180%	5−6 −180%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Far Cry 5	10−11 +150%	4−5 −150%
Forza Horizon 4	10−11 +150%	4−5 −150%
Hitman 3	21−24 +163%	8−9 −163%
Horizon Zero Dawn	18−20 +157%	7−8 −157%
Metro Exodus	27−30 +170%	10−11 −170%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	18−20 +157%	7−8 −157%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%
Watch Dogs: Legion	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

16−18

+167%

6−7
−167%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Far Cry New Dawn	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%
Hitman 3	10−11 +150%	4−5 −150%
Horizon Zero Dawn	8−9 +167%	3−4 −167%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	8−9 +167%	3−4 −167%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 +180%	5−6 −180%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Far Cry 5	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Forza Horizon 4	0−1	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	8−9 +167%	3−4 −167%
Metro Exodus	14−16 +180%	5−6 −180%
Watch Dogs: Legion	0−1	0−1