Radeon PRO W7800 vs GeForce GTX 680

Place in the ranking	362	14
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	3.06	30.88
Power efficiency	5.13	19.61
Architecture	Kepler (2012−2018)	RDNA 3.0 (2022−2024)
GPU code name	GK104	Navi 31
Market segment	Desktop	Workstation
Release date	22 March 2012 (12 years ago)	13 April 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$499	$2,499

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

PRO W7800 has 909% 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 cores	1536	4480
Core clock speed	1006 MHz	1895 MHz
Boost clock speed	1058 MHz	2525 MHz
Number of transistors	3,540 million	57,700 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	195 Watt	260 Watt
Texture fill rate	135.4	707.0
Floating-point processing power	3.25 TFLOPS	45.25 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	128
TMUs	128	280
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	70

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 support	PCI Express 3.0	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x16
Length	254 mm	280 mm
Height	4.376" (11.1 cm)	no data
Width	2-slot	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	2x 6-pin	2x 8-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 type	GDDR5	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	2048 MB	32 GB
Memory bus width	256-bit GDDR5	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	1502 MHz	2250 MHz
Memory bandwidth	192.2 GB/s	576.0 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 Connectors	One Dual Link DVI-I, One Dual Link DVI-D, One HDMI, One DisplayPort	3x DisplayPort 2.1, 1x mini-DisplayPort 2.1
Multi monitor support	4 displays	no data
HDMI	+	-
HDCP	+	-
Maximum VGA resolution	2048x1536	no data
Audio input for HDMI	Internal	no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_0)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	5.1	6.8
OpenGL	4.2	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	2.2
Vulkan	1.1.126	1.3
CUDA	+	-

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 14.51

PRO W7800 73.98
+410%

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 5576

PRO W7800 28439
+410%

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	45 −389%	220−230 +389%
Full HD	75 −367%	350−400 +367%
4K	26 −400%	130−140 +400%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	6.65 +7.3%	7.14 −7.3%
4K	19.19 +0.2%	19.22 −0.2%

GTX 680 has 7% lower cost per frame in 1080p
GTX 680 and PRO W7800 have nearly equal cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	24−27 −380%	120−130 +380%
Cyberpunk 2077	27−30 −383%	140−150 +383%
Elden Ring	45−50 −389%	220−230 +389%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	45−50 −389%	230−240 +389%
Counter-Strike 2	24−27 −380%	120−130 +380%
Cyberpunk 2077	27−30 −383%	140−150 +383%
Forza Horizon 4	55−60 −408%	300−310 +408%
Metro Exodus	40−45 −400%	200−210 +400%
Red Dead Redemption 2	35−40 −400%	180−190 +400%
Valorant	55−60 −400%	290−300 +400%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	45−50 −389%	230−240 +389%
Counter-Strike 2	24−27 −380%	120−130 +380%
Cyberpunk 2077	27−30 −383%	140−150 +383%
Dota 2	37 −386%	180−190 +386%
Elden Ring	45−50 −389%	220−230 +389%
Far Cry 5	50−55 −400%	270−280 +400%
Fortnite	80−85 −394%	400−450 +394%
Forza Horizon 4	55−60 −408%	300−310 +408%
Grand Theft Auto V	56 −400%	280−290 +400%
Metro Exodus	40−45 −400%	200−210 +400%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	100−110 −376%	500−550 +376%
Red Dead Redemption 2	35−40 −400%	180−190 +400%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	47 −389%	230−240 +389%
Valorant	55−60 −400%	290−300 +400%
World of Tanks	224 −391%	1100−1150 +391%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	45−50 −389%	230−240 +389%
Counter-Strike 2	24−27 −380%	120−130 +380%
Cyberpunk 2077	27−30 −383%	140−150 +383%
Dota 2	50−55 −400%	260−270 +400%
Far Cry 5	50−55 −400%	270−280 +400%
Forza Horizon 4	55−60 −408%	300−310 +408%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	100−110 −376%	500−550 +376%
Valorant	55−60 −400%	290−300 +400%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	21−24 −376%	100−105 +376%
Elden Ring	21−24 −400%	110−120 +400%
Grand Theft Auto V	21−24 −400%	110−120 +400%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	120−130 −380%	600−650 +380%
Red Dead Redemption 2	12−14 −400%	65−70 +400%
World of Tanks	100−110 −390%	500−550 +390%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	27−30 −383%	140−150 +383%
Counter-Strike 2	30−35 −400%	160−170 +400%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−12 −400%	55−60 +400%
Far Cry 5	35−40 −386%	170−180 +386%
Forza Horizon 4	35−40 −400%	180−190 +400%
Metro Exodus	30−35 −384%	150−160 +384%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	18−20 −400%	95−100 +400%
Valorant	35−40 −400%	180−190 +400%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	10−11 −400%	50−55 +400%
Dota 2	21 −376%	100−105 +376%
Elden Ring	10−11 −400%	50−55 +400%
Grand Theft Auto V	21 −376%	100−105 +376%
Metro Exodus	10−11 −400%	50−55 +400%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	40−45 −388%	210−220 +388%
Red Dead Redemption 2	9−10 −400%	45−50 +400%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	21 −376%	100−105 +376%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	14−16 −400%	70−75 +400%
Counter-Strike 2	10−11 −400%	50−55 +400%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −350%	18−20 +350%
Dota 2	24−27 −380%	120−130 +380%
Far Cry 5	18−20 −400%	90−95 +400%
Fortnite	16−18 −400%	80−85 +400%
Forza Horizon 4	20−22 −400%	100−105 +400%
Valorant	16−18 −400%	80−85 +400%

This is how GTX 680 and PRO W7800 compete in popular games:

PRO W7800 is 389% faster in 900p
PRO W7800 is 367% faster in 1080p
PRO W7800 is 400% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	14.51	73.98
Recency	22 March 2012	13 April 2023
Maximum RAM amount	2048 MB	32 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	195 Watt	260 Watt

GTX 680 has 33.3% lower power consumption.

PRO W7800, on the other hand, has a 409.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 460% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon PRO W7800 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 Radeon PRO W7800 is a workstation one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.