RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation vs GeForce GTX 680

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 680 and RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTX 680
2012
2048 MB GDDR5, 195 Watt
14.42

RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation outperforms GTX 680 by a whopping 275% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking36047
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation2.96no data
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code nameGK104AD104
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date22 March 2012 (12 years ago)21 March 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$499 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores15366144
CUDA cores1536no data
Core clock speed1006 MHz720 MHz
Boost clock speed1058 MHz1560 MHz
Number of transistors3,540 million35,800 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)195 Watt70 Watt
Texture fill rate135.4299.5
Floating-point processing power3.25 TFLOPS19.17 TFLOPS
ROPs3280
TMUs128192
Tensor Coresno data192
Ray Tracing Coresno data48

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 mm168 mm
Height4.376" (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-pinNone
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 MB20 GB
Memory bus width256-bit GDDR5160 Bit
Memory clock speed1502 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth192.2 GB/s280.0 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 DisplayPort4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a
Multi monitor support4 displaysno data
HDMI+-
HDCP+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIInternalno data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.16.7
OpenGL4.24.6
OpenCL1.23.0
Vulkan1.1.1261.3
CUDA+8.9

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.

GTX 680 14.42
RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation 54.07
+275%

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 5560
RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation 20853
+275%

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 18411
RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation 121634
+561%

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 17566
RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation 106030
+504%

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
−256%
160−170
+256%
Full HD76
−268%
280−290
+268%
4K24
−254%
85−90
+254%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
−264%
80−85
+264%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30−35
−264%
120−130
+264%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 21−24
−270%
85−90
+270%
Battlefield 5 45−50
−262%
170−180
+262%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 27−30
−245%
100−105
+245%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
−264%
80−85
+264%
Far Cry 5 30−35
−253%
120−130
+253%
Far Cry New Dawn 35−40
−259%
140−150
+259%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
−272%
350−400
+272%
Hitman 3 27−30
−270%
100−105
+270%
Horizon Zero Dawn 70−75
−265%
270−280
+265%
Metro Exodus 45−50
−267%
180−190
+267%
Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
−250%
140−150
+250%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 45−50
−262%
170−180
+262%
Watch Dogs: Legion 75−80
−268%
280−290
+268%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30−35
−264%
120−130
+264%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 21−24
−270%
85−90
+270%
Battlefield 5 45−50
−262%
170−180
+262%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 27−30
−245%
100−105
+245%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
−264%
80−85
+264%
Far Cry 5 30−35
−253%
120−130
+253%
Far Cry New Dawn 35−40
−259%
140−150
+259%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
−272%
350−400
+272%
Hitman 3 27−30
−270%
100−105
+270%
Horizon Zero Dawn 70−75
−265%
270−280
+265%
Metro Exodus 45−50
−267%
180−190
+267%
Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
−250%
140−150
+250%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 45−50
−262%
170−180
+262%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 94
−272%
350−400
+272%
Watch Dogs: Legion 75−80
−268%
280−290
+268%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30−35
−264%
120−130
+264%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 21−24
−270%
85−90
+270%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 27−30
−245%
100−105
+245%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
−264%
80−85
+264%
Far Cry 5 30−35
−253%
120−130
+253%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
−272%
350−400
+272%
Hitman 3 27−30
−270%
100−105
+270%
Horizon Zero Dawn 70−75
−265%
270−280
+265%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 45−50
−262%
170−180
+262%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 22
−264%
80−85
+264%
Watch Dogs: Legion 75−80
−268%
280−290
+268%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
−250%
140−150
+250%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 27−30
−257%
100−105
+257%
Far Cry New Dawn 21−24
−264%
80−85
+264%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16
−257%
50−55
+257%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−12
−264%
40−45
+264%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 14−16
−267%
55−60
+267%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
−243%
24−27
+243%
Far Cry 5 16−18
−253%
60−65
+253%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
−265%
270−280
+265%
Hitman 3 16−18
−253%
60−65
+253%
Horizon Zero Dawn 27−30
−245%
100−105
+245%
Metro Exodus 24−27
−260%
90−95
+260%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 24−27
−260%
90−95
+260%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
−267%
55−60
+267%
Watch Dogs: Legion 85−90
−237%
300−310
+237%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
−254%
85−90
+254%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
−257%
50−55
+257%
Far Cry New Dawn 10−12
−264%
40−45
+264%
Hitman 3 10−11
−250%
35−40
+250%
Horizon Zero Dawn 70−75
−266%
260−270
+266%
Metro Exodus 14−16
−257%
50−55
+257%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16
−244%
55−60
+244%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 8−9
−238%
27−30
+238%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 7−8
−243%
24−27
+243%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
−243%
24−27
+243%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−250%
7−8
+250%
Far Cry 5 8−9
−238%
27−30
+238%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
−268%
70−75
+268%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 14−16
−257%
50−55
+257%
Watch Dogs: Legion 6−7
−250%
21−24
+250%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
−246%
45−50
+246%

This is how GTX 680 and RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation compete in popular games:

  • RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation is 256% faster in 900p
  • RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation is 268% faster in 1080p
  • RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation is 254% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 14.42 54.07
Recency 22 March 2012 21 March 2023
Maximum RAM amount 2048 MB 20 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 195 Watt 70 Watt

RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation has a 275% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, a 900% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 460% more advanced lithography process, and 178.6% lower power consumption.

The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 680 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 GTX 680
GeForce GTX 680
NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation
RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation

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.


3.8 563 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3 48 votes

Rate RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation 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.