GeForce RTX 3070 vs GTX 680

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 680 and GeForce RTX 3070, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTX 680
2012
2048 MB GDDR5, 195 Watt
13.98

RTX 3070 outperforms GTX 680 by a whopping 298% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking37550
Place by popularitynot in top-10038
Cost-effectiveness evaluation2.9656.91
Power efficiency5.0717.90
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code nameGK104GA104
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date22 March 2012 (13 years ago)1 September 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$499 $499

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

RTX 3070 has 1823% better value for money than GTX 680.

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 cores15365888
Core clock speed1006 MHz1500 MHz
Boost clock speed1058 MHz1725 MHz
Number of transistors3,540 million17,400 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)195 Watt220 Watt
Texture fill rate135.4317.4
Floating-point processing power3.25 TFLOPS20.31 TFLOPS
ROPs3296
TMUs128184
Tensor Coresno data184
Ray Tracing Coresno data46

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).

Bus supportPCI Express 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Length254 mm242 mm
Height4.376" (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-pin1x 12-pin
SLI options+-

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 MB8 GB
Memory bus width256-bit GDDR5256 Bit
Memory clock speed1502 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth192.2 GB/s448.0 GB/s
Shared memory--
Resizable BAR-+

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 HDMI, 3x DisplayPort
Multi monitor support4 displaysno data
HDMI++
HDCP+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIInternalno data

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.16.5
OpenGL4.24.6
OpenCL1.22.0
Vulkan1.1.1261.2
CUDA+8.5
DLSS-+

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.

GTX 680 13.98
RTX 3070 55.67
+298%

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.

GTX 680 5589
RTX 3070 22256
+298%

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.

GTX 680 10217
RTX 3070 43005
+321%

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.

GTX 680 29702
RTX 3070 88744
+199%

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.

GTX 680 7587
RTX 3070 31020
+309%

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.

GTX 680 47130
RTX 3070 154864
+229%

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

GTX 680 18363
RTX 3070 123479
+572%

3DMark Ice Storm GPU

Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.

GTX 680 247306
RTX 3070 502470
+103%

GeekBench 5 Vulkan

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses Vulkan API by AMD & Khronos Group.

GTX 680 17519
RTX 3070 120982
+591%

GeekBench 5 CUDA

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses CUDA API by NVIDIA.

GTX 680 13248
RTX 3070 149734
+1030%

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
−278%
170−180
+278%
Full HD75
−97.3%
148
+97.3%
1440p24−27
−313%
99
+313%
4K25
−152%
63
+152%

Cost per frame, $

1080p6.65
−97.3%
3.37
+97.3%
1440p20.79
−313%
5.04
+313%
4K19.96
−152%
7.92
+152%
  • RTX 3070 has 97% lower cost per frame in 1080p
  • RTX 3070 has 313% lower cost per frame in 1440p
  • RTX 3070 has 152% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 75−80
−271%
280−290
+271%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
−425%
147
+425%
Hogwarts Legacy 24−27
−420%
130−140
+420%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 55−60
−153%
149
+153%
Counter-Strike 2 75−80
−334%
330
+334%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
−396%
139
+396%
Far Cry 5 45−50
−242%
154
+242%
Fortnite 75−80
−203%
230−240
+203%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
−261%
200−210
+261%
Forza Horizon 5 40−45
−270%
159
+270%
Hogwarts Legacy 24−27
−400%
125
+400%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
−259%
170−180
+259%
Valorant 110−120
−155%
290−300
+155%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 55−60
−124%
132
+124%
Counter-Strike 2 75−80
−238%
257
+238%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 224
−24.1%
270−280
+24.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
−350%
126
+350%
Dota 2 85−90
−51.1%
133
+51.1%
Far Cry 5 45−50
−229%
148
+229%
Fortnite 75−80
−203%
230−240
+203%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
−261%
200−210
+261%
Forza Horizon 5 40−45
−244%
148
+244%
Grand Theft Auto V 56
−148%
139
+148%
Hogwarts Legacy 24−27
−320%
105
+320%
Metro Exodus 27−30
−329%
120
+329%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
−259%
170−180
+259%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 42
−448%
230
+448%
Valorant 110−120
−155%
290−300
+155%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 55−60
−102%
119
+102%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
−264%
102
+264%
Dota 2 85−90
−42%
125
+42%
Far Cry 5 45−50
−213%
141
+213%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
−261%
200−210
+261%
Hogwarts Legacy 24−27
−224%
81
+224%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
−259%
170−180
+259%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 22
−450%
121
+450%
Valorant 110−120
−106%
237
+106%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 75−80
−203%
230−240
+203%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 24−27
−542%
167
+542%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 100−110
−282%
350−400
+282%
Grand Theft Auto V 21−24
−345%
98
+345%
Metro Exodus 16−18
−341%
75
+341%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140
−31.6%
170−180
+31.6%
Valorant 140−150
−132%
300−350
+132%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
−171%
103
+171%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
−417%
62
+417%
Far Cry 5 27−30
−331%
125
+331%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
−412%
160−170
+412%
Hogwarts Legacy 14−16
−320%
63
+320%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 20−22
−495%
110−120
+495%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 30−33
−397%
140−150
+397%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 9−10
−378%
43
+378%
Grand Theft Auto V 21
−457%
117
+457%
Hogwarts Legacy 8−9
−350%
35−40
+350%
Metro Exodus 10−11
−390%
49
+390%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16
−463%
90
+463%
Valorant 70−75
−315%
300−350
+315%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 18−20
−268%
70
+268%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
−667%
65−70
+667%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−500%
30
+500%
Dota 2 45−50
−155%
125
+155%
Far Cry 5 14−16
−400%
70
+400%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
−400%
120−130
+400%
Hogwarts Legacy 8−9
−338%
35
+338%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
−615%
90−95
+615%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 12−14
−500%
75−80
+500%

This is how GTX 680 and RTX 3070 compete in popular games:

  • RTX 3070 is 278% faster in 900p
  • RTX 3070 is 97% faster in 1080p
  • RTX 3070 is 313% faster in 1440p
  • RTX 3070 is 152% faster in 4K

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

  • in Counter-Strike 2, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the RTX 3070 is 667% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, RTX 3070 surpassed GTX 680 in all 66 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 13.98 55.67
Recency 22 March 2012 1 September 2020
Maximum RAM amount 2048 MB 8 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 8 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 195 Watt 220 Watt

GTX 680 has 12.8% lower power consumption.

RTX 3070, on the other hand, has a 298.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 250% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce RTX 3070 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 680 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 GTX 680
GeForce GTX 680
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070
GeForce RTX 3070

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.


3.8 606 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3 12276 votes

Rate GeForce RTX 3070 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GTX 680 or GeForce RTX 3070, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.