Radeon 780M vs GeForce GTX 680M

Place in the ranking	501	299
Place by popularity	not in top-100	49
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	3.64	no data
Power efficiency	5.85	85.06
Architecture	Kepler (2012−2018)	RDNA 3.0 (2022−2024)
GPU code name	GK104	Hawx Point
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	4 June 2012 (12 years ago)	6 December 2023 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$310.50	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 cores	1344	768
Core clock speed	719 MHz	800 MHz
Boost clock speed	758 MHz	2700 MHz
Number of transistors	3,540 million	25,390 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	4 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	15 Watt
Texture fill rate	84.90	129.6
Floating-point processing power	2.038 TFLOPS	8.294 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	32
TMUs	112	48
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	12

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).

Laptop size	large	no data
Bus support	PCI Express 3.0	no data
Interface	MXM-B (3.0)	PCIe 4.0 x8
Supplementary power connectors	None	None
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	System Shared
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	System Shared
Memory bus width	256 Bit	System Shared
Memory clock speed	1800 MHz	System Shared
Memory bandwidth	115.2 GB/s	no data
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

No outputs

Portable Device Dependent

Supported technologies

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

Optimus

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 API	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	5.1	6.8
OpenGL	4.5	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	2.1
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 680M 8.40

Radeon 780M 18.33
+118%

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 680M 3239

Radeon 780M 7072
+118%

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 680M 5898

Radeon 780M 12785
+117%

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 680M 21534

Radeon 780M 41622
+93.3%

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 680M 4049

Radeon 780M 7977
+97%

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 680M 27684

Radeon 780M 48105
+73.8%

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	67 −109%	140−150 +109%
Full HD	63 +75%	36 −75%
1440p	9−10 −122%	20 +122%
4K	5−6 −160%	13 +160%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	4.93	no data
1440p	34.50	no data
4K	62.10	no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

12−14

−200%

39
+200%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	20−22 −105%	40−45 +105%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	12−14 −150%	30−33 +150%
Battlefield 5	24−27 −140%	60−65 +140%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	16−18 −118%	35−40 +118%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 −138%	31 +138%
Far Cry 5	18−20 −126%	40−45 +126%
Far Cry New Dawn	21−24 −113%	45−50 +113%
Forza Horizon 4	55−60 −109%	110−120 +109%
Hitman 3	16−18 −119%	35−40 +119%
Horizon Zero Dawn	45−50 −91.5%	90−95 +91.5%
Metro Exodus	24−27 −152%	60−65 +152%
Red Dead Redemption 2	21−24 −113%	45−50 +113%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	27−30 −114%	60−65 +114%
Watch Dogs: Legion	55−60 −50%	85−90 +50%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	20−22 −105%	40−45 +105%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	12−14 −150%	30−33 +150%
Battlefield 5	24−27 −140%	60−65 +140%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	16−18 −118%	35−40 +118%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 −84.6%	24 +84.6%
Far Cry 5	18−20 −126%	40−45 +126%
Far Cry New Dawn	21−24 −113%	45−50 +113%
Forza Horizon 4	55−60 −109%	110−120 +109%
Hitman 3	16−18 −119%	35−40 +119%
Horizon Zero Dawn	45−50 −91.5%	90−95 +91.5%
Metro Exodus	24−27 −152%	60−65 +152%
Red Dead Redemption 2	21−24 −113%	45−50 +113%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	27−30 −92.9%	54 +92.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	24−27 −75%	40−45 +75%
Watch Dogs: Legion	55−60 −50%	85−90 +50%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	20−22 −105%	40−45 +105%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	12−14 −150%	30−33 +150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	16−18 −118%	35−40 +118%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 −76.9%	23 +76.9%
Far Cry 5	18−20 −126%	40−45 +126%
Forza Horizon 4	55−60 −109%	110−120 +109%
Hitman 3	16−18 −119%	35−40 +119%
Horizon Zero Dawn	45−50 −12.8%	53 +12.8%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	27−30 −64.3%	46 +64.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	24−27 −20.8%	29 +20.8%
Watch Dogs: Legion	55−60 +222%	18 −222%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

21−24

−113%

45−50
+113%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	16−18 −119%	35−40 +119%
Far Cry New Dawn	12−14 −115%	27−30 +115%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	8−9 −138%	18−20 +138%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	4−5 −300%	16−18 +300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	8−9 −150%	20−22 +150%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −150%	10−11 +150%
Far Cry 5	10−11 −110%	21−24 +110%
Forza Horizon 4	30−35 −203%	100−105 +203%
Hitman 3	12−14 −83.3%	21−24 +83.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn	16−18 −118%	35−40 +118%
Metro Exodus	10−12 −209%	30−35 +209%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	8−9 −300%	32 +300%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	8−9 −150%	20 +150%
Watch Dogs: Legion	50−55 −108%	110−120 +108%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

14−16

−114%

30−33
+114%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	7−8 −157%	18−20 +157%
Far Cry New Dawn	6−7 −133%	14−16 +133%
Hitman 3	4−5 −250%	14−16 +250%
Horizon Zero Dawn	30−35 −203%	90−95 +203%
Metro Exodus	6−7 −217%	18−20 +217%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	5−6 −200%	15 +200%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	5−6 −120%	10−12 +120%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	4−5 −125%	9−10 +125%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 −150%	10−11 +150%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −200%	3−4 +200%
Far Cry 5	4−5 −150%	10−11 +150%
Forza Horizon 4	10−11 −150%	24−27 +150%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	4−5 −325%	17 +325%
Watch Dogs: Legion	3−4 −167%	8−9 +167%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

8−9

−100%

16−18
+100%

This is how GTX 680M and Radeon 780M compete in popular games:

Radeon 780M is 109% faster in 900p
GTX 680M is 75% faster in 1080p
Radeon 780M is 122% faster in 1440p
Radeon 780M is 160% faster in 4K

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

in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GTX 680M is 222% faster.
in Shadow of the Tomb Raider, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Radeon 780M is 325% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

GTX 680M is ahead in 1 test (1%)
Radeon 780M is ahead in 71 test (99%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	8.40	18.33
Recency	4 June 2012	6 December 2023
Chip lithography	28 nm	4 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	15 Watt

Radeon 780M has a 118.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, a 600% more advanced lithography process, and 566.7% lower power consumption.

The Radeon 780M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 680M in performance tests.

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