GeForce GTX 680M vs 780 Ti

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 780 Ti with GeForce GTX 680M, including specs and performance data.

GTX 780 Ti
2013
3 GB GDDR5, 250 Watt
24.64
+199%

780 Ti outperforms 680M by a whopping 199% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking205476
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation5.253.57
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameGK110N13E-GTX
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date7 November 2013 (10 years ago)4 June 2012 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$699 $310.50
Current price$461 (0.7x MSRP)$293 (0.9x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTX 780 Ti has 47% better value for money than GTX 680M.

Detailed specifications

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 cores28801344
CUDA cores28801344
Core clock speed875 MHz720 MHz
Boost clock speed928 MHz758 MHz
Number of transistors7,080 million3,540 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Watt100 Watt
Texture fill rate210 billion/sec80.6 billion/sec
Floating-point performance5,345 gflops2,038 gflops

Form factor & compatibility

Information on GeForce GTX 780 Ti and GeForce GTX 680M compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). 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 sizeno datalarge
Bus supportPCI Express 3.0PCI Express 3.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16MXM-B (3.0)
Length10.5" (26.7 cm)no data
Height4.376" (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsOne 8-pin and one 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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount3 GB4 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed7.0 GB/s1800 MHz
Memory bandwidth336 GB/s115.2 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 DisplayPortNo outputs
Multi monitor support4 displaysno data
HDMI+no data
HDCP+no data
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIInternalno data

Supported technologies

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

Blu Ray 3D+no data
3D Gaming+no data
3D Vision+no data
Optimusno data+
3D Vision Live+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_1)12 API
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.44.5
OpenCL1.21.1
Vulkan1.1.1261.1.126
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 780 Ti 24.64
+199%
GTX 680M 8.25

780 Ti outperforms 680M by 199% based on our aggregate benchmark results.


Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

GTX 780 Ti 9516
+199%
GTX 680M 3187

780 Ti outperforms 680M by 199% in Passmark.

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 780 Ti 15619
+165%
GTX 680M 5898

780 Ti outperforms 680M by 165% in 3DMark 11 Performance GPU.

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 780 Ti 38813
+80.2%
GTX 680M 21534

780 Ti outperforms 680M by 80% in 3DMark Vantage Performance.

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 780 Ti 11812
+192%
GTX 680M 4049

780 Ti outperforms 680M by 192% 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 780 Ti 75688
+173%
GTX 680M 27684

780 Ti outperforms 680M by 173% in 3DMark Cloud Gate GPU.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 9%

GTX 780 Ti 28179
+173%
GTX 680M 10338

780 Ti outperforms 680M by 173% in GeekBench 5 OpenCL.

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 780 Ti 143
+149%
GTX 680M 58

780 Ti outperforms 680M by 149% in Unigine Heaven 3.0.

Octane Render OctaneBench

This is a special benchmark measuring graphics card performance in OctaneRender, which is a realistic GPU rendering engine by OTOY Inc., available either as a standalone program, or as a plugin for 3DS Max, Cinema 4D and many other apps. It renders four different static scenes, then compares render times with a reference GPU which is currently GeForce GTX 980. This benchmark has nothing to do with gaming and is aimed at professional 3D graphics artists.

Benchmark coverage: 4%

GTX 780 Ti 103
+212%
GTX 680M 33

780 Ti outperforms 680M by 212% in Octane Render OctaneBench.

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:

900p200−210
+199%
67
−199%
Full HD95
+37.7%
69
−37.7%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 40−45 no data

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 45−50 no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 40−45 no data
Battlefield 5 80−85 no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 50−55 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45 no data
Far Cry 5 55−60 no data
Far Cry New Dawn 60−65 no data
Forza Horizon 4 100−110 no data
Hitman 3 50−55 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 95−100 no data
Metro Exodus 80−85 no data
Red Dead Redemption 2 65−70 no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 80−85 no data
Watch Dogs: Legion 70−75 no data

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 45−50 no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 40−45 no data
Battlefield 5 80−85 no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 50−55 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45 no data
Far Cry 5 55−60 no data
Far Cry New Dawn 60−65 no data
Forza Horizon 4 100−110 no data
Hitman 3 50−55 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 95−100 no data
Metro Exodus 80−85 no data
Red Dead Redemption 2 65−70 no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 80−85 no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 55−60 no data
Watch Dogs: Legion 70−75 no data

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 45−50 no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 40−45 no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 50−55 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45 no data
Far Cry 5 55−60 no data
Forza Horizon 4 100−110 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 95−100 no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 80−85 no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 55−60 no data
Watch Dogs: Legion 70−75 no data

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 65−70 no data

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 45−50 no data
Far Cry New Dawn 50−55 no data

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 24−27 no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 24−27 no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−35 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18 no data
Far Cry 5 40−45 no data
Forza Horizon 4 45−50 no data
Hitman 3 27−30 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 50−55 no data
Metro Exodus 45−50 no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 50−55 no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−33 no data
Watch Dogs: Legion 18−20 no data

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45 no data

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27 no data
Far Cry New Dawn 18−20 no data
Hitman 3 18−20 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 27−30 no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16−18 no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30 no data

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16 no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14 no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 14−16 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7 no data
Far Cry 5 14−16 no data
Forza Horizon 4 30−35 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 27−30 no data
Metro Exodus 24−27 no data
Watch Dogs: Legion 10−12 no data

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24 no data

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

  • GTX 780 Ti is 199% faster in 900p
  • GTX 780 Ti is 38% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 24.64 8.25
Recency 7 November 2013 4 June 2012
Cost $699 $310.5
Maximum RAM amount 3 GB 4 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 250 Watt 100 Watt

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

Be aware that GeForce GTX 780 Ti is a desktop card while GeForce GTX 680M is a notebook one.


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 780 Ti
GeForce GTX 780 Ti
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M
GeForce GTX 680M

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.


4 628 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 780 Ti on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 44 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 680M 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.