680M vs 765M SLI

#ad
Buy
VS

Combined performance score

GTX 765M SLI
10.58
+27.6%

765M SLI outperforms 680M by 28% in our combined benchmark results.

General info

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

Place in performance ranking394467
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Value for money11.133.43
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameno dataN13E-GTX
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date30 May 2013 (10 years old)4 June 2012 (11 years old)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$310.50
Current price$149 $293 (0.9x MSRP)
Value for money

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTX 765M SLI has 224% better value for money than GTX 680M.

Technical specs

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 cores15361344
CUDA coresno data1344
Core clock speed850 MHz720 MHz
Boost clock speedno data758 MHz
Number of transistors2x 2540 Million3,540 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)130 Watt100 Watt
Texture fill rateno data80.6 billion/sec
Floating-point performanceno data2,038 gflops

Size and compatibility

Information on GeForce GTX 765M SLI and GeForce GTX 680M compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. 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 sizelargelarge
Bus supportno dataPCI Express 3.0
Interfaceno dataMXM-B (3.0)
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone
SLI options++

Memory

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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount2x 2 GB4 GB
Memory bus width2x 128 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed4000 MHz1800 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data115.2 GB/s
Shared memory--

Video outputs and ports

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 Connectorsno dataNo outputs

Technologies

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

Optimus++

API support

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

DirectX1112 API
Shader Modelno data5.1
OpenGLno data4.5
OpenCLno data1.1
Vulkanno data1.1.126
CUDA++

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 765M SLI 10.58
+27.6%
GTX 680M 8.29

765M SLI outperforms 680M by 28% in our combined benchmark results.


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 765M SLI 25021
+16.2%
GTX 680M 21534

765M SLI outperforms 680M by 16% in 3DMark Vantage Performance.

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 765M SLI 7944
+34.7%
GTX 680M 5898

765M SLI outperforms 680M by 35% in 3DMark 11 Performance GPU.

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 765M SLI 5073
+25.3%
GTX 680M 4049

765M SLI outperforms 680M by 25% 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 765M SLI 35376
+27.8%
GTX 680M 27684

765M SLI outperforms 680M by 28% in 3DMark Cloud Gate GPU.

Unigine Heaven 3.0

This is an old DirectX 11 benchmark using Unigine, a 3D game engine by eponymous Russian company. It displays a fantasy medieval town sprawling over several flying islands. Version 3.0 was released in 2012, and in 2013 it was superseded by Heaven 4.0, which introduced several slight improvements, including a newer version of Unigine.

Benchmark coverage: 4%

GTX 765M SLI 68
+18.2%
GTX 680M 58

765M SLI outperforms 680M by 18% in Unigine Heaven 3.0.

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:

900p85−90
+26.9%
67
−26.9%
Full HD71
+10.9%
64
−10.9%

Performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+23.1%
12−14
−23.1%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 21−24
+29.4%
16−18
−29.4%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18
+33.3%
12−14
−33.3%
Battlefield 5 35−40
+28.6%
27−30
−28.6%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 27−30
+21.7%
21−24
−21.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+23.1%
12−14
−23.1%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+35%
20−22
−35%
Far Cry New Dawn 27−30
+33.3%
21−24
−33.3%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+27.6%
27−30
−27.6%
Hitman 3 27−30
+28.6%
21−24
−28.6%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+29.4%
16−18
−29.4%
Red Dead Redemption 2 18−20
+20%
14−16
−20%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 21−24
+22.2%
18−20
−22.2%
Watch Dogs: Legion 18−20
+35.7%
14−16
−35.7%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 21−24
+29.4%
16−18
−29.4%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18
+33.3%
12−14
−33.3%
Battlefield 5 35−40
+28.6%
27−30
−28.6%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 27−30
+21.7%
21−24
−21.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+23.1%
12−14
−23.1%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+35%
20−22
−35%
Far Cry New Dawn 27−30
+33.3%
21−24
−33.3%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+27.6%
27−30
−27.6%
Hitman 3 27−30
+28.6%
21−24
−28.6%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+29.4%
16−18
−29.4%
Metro Exodus 16−18
+33.3%
12−14
−33.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2 18−20
+20%
14−16
−20%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 21−24
+22.2%
18−20
−22.2%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+29.4%
16−18
−29.4%
Watch Dogs: Legion 18−20
+35.7%
14−16
−35.7%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 21−24
+29.4%
16−18
−29.4%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18
+33.3%
12−14
−33.3%
Battlefield 5 35−40
+28.6%
27−30
−28.6%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+23.1%
12−14
−23.1%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+35%
20−22
−35%
Far Cry New Dawn 27−30
+33.3%
21−24
−33.3%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+27.6%
27−30
−27.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+29.4%
16−18
−29.4%
Watch Dogs: Legion 18−20
+35.7%
14−16
−35.7%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 14−16
+25%
12−14
−25%
Hitman 3 16−18
+23.1%
12−14
−23.1%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
+14.3%
14−16
−14.3%
Metro Exodus 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%
Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 14−16
+27.3%
10−12
−27.3%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−11
+42.9%
7−8
−42.9%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
Battlefield 5 18−20
+58.3%
12−14
−58.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+30.8%
12−14
−30.8%
Far Cry New Dawn 18−20
+50%
12−14
−50%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+35.7%
14−16
−35.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
+25%
8−9
−25%
Watch Dogs: Legion 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Hitman 3 10−11
+25%
8−9
−25%
Horizon Zero Dawn 9−10
+12.5%
8−9
−12.5%
Metro Exodus 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
+60%
5−6
−60%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Battlefield 5 9−10
+80%
5−6
−80%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+28.6%
7−8
−28.6%
Far Cry New Dawn 10−12
+22.2%
9−10
−22.2%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+44.4%
9−10
−44.4%
Watch Dogs: Legion 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%

This is how GTX 765M SLI and GTX 680M compete in popular games:

900p resolution:

  • GTX 765M SLI is 26.9% faster than GTX 680M

1080p resolution:

  • GTX 765M SLI is 10.9% faster than GTX 680M

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

  • in Metro Exodus, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the GTX 765M SLI is 100% faster than the GTX 680M.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GTX 765M SLI is ahead in 67 tests (99%)
  • there's a draw in 1 test (1%)

Advantages and disadvantages


Performance score 10.58 8.29
Recency 30 May 2013 4 June 2012
Power consumption (TDP) 130 Watt 100 Watt

The GeForce GTX 765M SLI 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.

User ratings

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M SLI
GeForce GTX 765M SLI
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M
GeForce GTX 680M

Similar GPU comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

User ratings: view and submit

Here you can see the user rating of the graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


1.3 24 votes

Rate NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M SLI on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 41 vote

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions and comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.