GeForce RTX 2050 Mobile vs GTX 680

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

GTX 680
2012
2048 MB GDDR5, 195 Watt
14.36

RTX 2050 Mobile outperforms GTX 680 by a substantial 30% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking340280
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation5.14no data
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Ampere (2020−2022)
GPU code nameGK104GN20-S7
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date22 March 2012 (12 years ago)17 December 2021 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$499 no data
Current price$156 (0.3x 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 cores15362048
CUDA cores1536no data
Core clock speed1006 MHzno data
Boost clock speed1058 MHz1477 MHz
Number of transistors3,540 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)195 Watt30-45 Watt
Texture fill rate128.8 billion/sec189.1
Floating-point performance3,090.4 gflopsno data

Form factor & compatibility

Information on GeForce GTX 680 and GeForce RTX 2050 Mobile 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.

Laptop sizeno datalarge
Bus supportPCI Express 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length10.0" (25.4 cm)no data
Height4.376" (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsTwo 6-pinno data
SLI options+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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount2048 MB4 GB
Memory bus width256-bit GDDR564 Bit
Memory clock speed6000 MHz14000 MHz
Memory bandwidth192.2 GB/s112.0 GB/s
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 ConnectorsOne Dual Link DVI-I, One Dual Link DVI-D, One HDMI, One DisplayPort1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 2x DisplayPort
Multi monitor support4 displaysno data
HDMI++
HDCP+no data
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
G-SYNC supportno data+
Audio input for HDMIInternalno data

Supported technologies

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

VR Readyno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.16.6
OpenGL4.24.6
OpenCL1.23.0
Vulkan1.1.1261.2
CUDA+8.6

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 680 14.36
RTX 2050 Mobile 18.64
+29.8%

RTX 2050 Mobile outperforms GTX 680 by 30% based on our aggregated benchmark results.


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 680 10217
RTX 2050 Mobile 12268
+20.1%

RTX 2050 Mobile outperforms GTX 680 by 20% in 3DMark 11 Performance GPU.

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

GTX 680 29702
RTX 2050 Mobile 46821
+57.6%

RTX 2050 Mobile outperforms GTX 680 by 58% in 3DMark Vantage Performance.

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

GTX 680 7587
RTX 2050 Mobile 8881
+17%

RTX 2050 Mobile outperforms GTX 680 by 17% in 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics.

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

GTX 680 47130
RTX 2050 Mobile 58068
+23.2%

RTX 2050 Mobile outperforms GTX 680 by 23% in 3DMark Cloud Gate 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:

900p45
−22.2%
55−60
+22.2%
Full HD75
+74.4%
43
−74.4%
1440p18−21
−44.4%
26
+44.4%
4K24
−37.5%
33
+37.5%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
−123%
49
+123%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30−33
−26.7%
35−40
+26.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 21−24
−82.6%
42
+82.6%
Battlefield 5 45−50
−29.8%
60−65
+29.8%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−35
−32.3%
40−45
+32.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
−90.9%
42
+90.9%
Far Cry 5 35−40
−23.1%
45−50
+23.1%
Far Cry New Dawn 40−45
−30%
50−55
+30%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
−27.1%
60−65
+27.1%
Hitman 3 30−35
−106%
68
+106%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50
−32.6%
60−65
+32.6%
Metro Exodus 40−45
−30.2%
55−60
+30.2%
Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
−27.5%
50−55
+27.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 40−45
−87.5%
75
+87.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion 24−27
−76.9%
46
+76.9%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30−33
−26.7%
35−40
+26.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 21−24
+9.5%
21
−9.5%
Battlefield 5 45−50
−29.8%
60−65
+29.8%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−35
−32.3%
40−45
+32.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
−36.4%
30
+36.4%
Far Cry 5 35−40
−79.5%
70
+79.5%
Far Cry New Dawn 40−45
−30%
50−55
+30%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
−27.1%
60−65
+27.1%
Hitman 3 30−35
+57.1%
21
−57.1%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50
−32.6%
60−65
+32.6%
Metro Exodus 40−45
−30.2%
55−60
+30.2%
Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
−27.5%
50−55
+27.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 40−45
+29%
31
−29%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 42
−38.1%
58
+38.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion 24−27
−50%
39
+50%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30−33
−26.7%
35−40
+26.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 21−24
+229%
7
−229%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−35
−32.3%
40−45
+32.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
−13.6%
25
+13.6%
Far Cry 5 35−40
−23.1%
45−50
+23.1%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
−27.1%
60−65
+27.1%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50
−32.6%
60−65
+32.6%
Metro Exodus 40−45
−30.2%
55−60
+30.2%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 22
−54.5%
34
+54.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion 24−27
+44.4%
18
−44.4%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
−27.5%
50−55
+27.5%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 27−30
−28.6%
35−40
+28.6%
Far Cry New Dawn 24−27
−42.3%
35−40
+42.3%
Hitman 3 21−24
−28.6%
27−30
+28.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2 10−11
−40%
14−16
+40%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16
−33.3%
20−22
+33.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−12
−54.5%
16−18
+54.5%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18−20
−33.3%
24−27
+33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
−57.1%
10−12
+57.1%
Far Cry 5 21−24
−60.9%
37
+60.9%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
−33.3%
35−40
+33.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 27−30
−31%
35−40
+31%
Metro Exodus 24−27
−36%
30−35
+36%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 24−27
−88%
47
+88%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
−40%
21−24
+40%
Watch Dogs: Legion 9−10
−33.3%
12−14
+33.3%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry 5 30−35
−77.4%
55
+77.4%
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16
−42.9%
20−22
+42.9%
Hitman 3 10−11
−40%
14−16
+40%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
−40%
21−24
+40%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 9−10
−33.3%
12−14
+33.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16
−18.8%
18−20
+18.8%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 8−9
−37.5%
10−12
+37.5%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 7−8
−28.6%
9−10
+28.6%
Battlefield 5 14−16
−40%
21−24
+40%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 9−10
−44.4%
12−14
+44.4%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
−31.6%
24−27
+31.6%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
−40%
21−24
+40%
Metro Exodus 14−16
−28.6%
18−20
+28.6%
Watch Dogs: Legion 5−6
−60%
8−9
+60%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
−23.1%
16−18
+23.1%

This is how GTX 680 and RTX 2050 Mobile compete in popular games:

  • RTX 2050 Mobile is 22% faster in 900p
  • GTX 680 is 74% faster in 1080p
  • RTX 2050 Mobile is 44% faster in 1440p
  • RTX 2050 Mobile is 38% faster in 4K

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

  • in Assassin's Creed Valhalla, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GTX 680 is 229% faster than the RTX 2050 Mobile.
  • in Cyberpunk 2077, with 1080p resolution and the Low Preset, the RTX 2050 Mobile is 123% faster than the GTX 680.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GTX 680 is ahead in 5 tests (7%)
  • RTX 2050 Mobile is ahead in 67 tests (93%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 14.36 18.64
Recency 22 March 2012 17 December 2021
Maximum RAM amount 2048 MB 4 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 8 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 195 Watt 30 Watt

The GeForce RTX 2050 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 680 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 680 is a desktop card while GeForce RTX 2050 Mobile is a notebook one.


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 GTX 680
GeForce GTX 680
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2050 Mobile
GeForce RTX 2050 Mobile

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.


3.8 558 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 1529 votes

Rate GeForce RTX 2050 Mobile 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.