Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
680M SLI vs 970M
- Interface MXM-B (3.0)
- Core clock speed 924 + Boost
- Max video memory 6 GB
- Memory type GDDR5
- Memory clock speed 2500 MHz
- Maximum resolution
- Interface
- Core clock speed 720
- Max video memory 2x 4096 MB
- Memory type GDDR5
- Memory clock speed 3600
- Maximum resolution
General info
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
Place in performance rating | 277 | 253 |
Value for money | 3.36 | 24.15 |
Architecture | Maxwell (2014−2018) | Kepler (2012−2018) |
GPU code name | GM204 | N13E-GTX |
Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
Release date | 7 October 2014 (8 years old) | 4 June 2012 (10 years old) |
Launch price (MSRP) | $2,560.89 | no data |
Current price | $848 (0.3x MSRP) | $149 |
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 cores | 1280 | 2688 |
CUDA cores | 1280 | no data |
Core clock speed | 924 MHz | 720 MHz |
Boost clock speed | 1038 MHz | no data |
Number of transistors | 5,200 million | no data |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
Thermal design power (TDP) | unknown | no data |
Texture fill rate | 83.04 | no data |
Floating-point performance | 2,657 gflops | no data |
Size and compatibility
Information on GeForce GTX 970M and GeForce GTX 680M SLI 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 size | large | large |
Bus support | PCI Express 3.0 | no data |
Interface | MXM-B (3.0) | no data |
Supplementary power connectors | None | no data |
SLI options | + | + |
Memory
Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated VRAM and use a shared part of system RAM.
Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Maximum RAM amount | 6 GB | 2x 4 GB |
Memory bus width | 192 Bit | 2x 256 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 2500 MHz | 3600 MHz |
Memory bandwidth | 120 GB/s | no data |
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 Connectors | No outputs | no data |
VGA аnalog display support | + | no data |
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support | + | no data |
HDMI | + | no data |
G-SYNC support | + | no data |
Technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
GameStream | + | no data |
GeForce ShadowPlay | + | no data |
GPU Boost | 2.0 | no data |
GameWorks | + | no data |
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder | + | no data |
Optimus | + | + |
BatteryBoost | + | no data |
Ansel | + | no data |
API support
APIs supported, including particular versions of those APIs.
DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 11 |
Shader Model | 6.4 | no data |
OpenGL | 4.5 | no data |
OpenCL | 1.1 | no data |
Vulkan | 1.1.126 | no data |
CUDA | + | + |
Benchmark performance
Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. Note that overall benchmark performance is measured in points in 0-100 range.
Overall score
This is our combined benchmark performance rating. 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.
- 3DMark Vantage Performance
- 3DMark 11 Performance GPU
- Unigine Heaven 3.0
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: 16%
GeForce GTX 680M SLI outperforms GeForce GTX 970M by 13% 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: 16%
GeForce GTX 680M SLI outperforms GeForce GTX 970M by 11% in 3DMark 11 Performance 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%
GeForce GTX 680M SLI outperforms GeForce GTX 970M by 16% in Unigine Heaven 3.0.
Mining hashrates
Cryptocurrency mining performance of GeForce GTX 970M and GeForce GTX 680M SLI. Usually measured in megahashes per second.
Bitcoin / BTC (SHA256) | 314 Mh/s | no data |
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Average FPS
Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:
900p | 136
+2.3%
| 133
−2.3%
|
Full HD | 58
−69%
| 98
+69%
|
1440p | 27 | no data |
4K | 21 | no data |
Popular games
- Full HD
Low Preset - Full HD
Medium Preset - Full HD
High Preset - Full HD
Ultra Preset - 1440p
High Preset - 1440p
Ultra Preset - 4K
High Preset - 4K
Ultra Preset
Cyberpunk 2077 | 24−27
−12%
|
27−30
+12%
|
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 42
+23.5%
|
30−35
−23.5%
|
Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 24−27
−16.7%
|
27−30
+16.7%
|
Battlefield 5 | 66
+15.8%
|
55−60
−15.8%
|
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 35−40
−13.2%
|
40−45
+13.2%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 24−27
−12%
|
27−30
+12%
|
Far Cry 5 | 46
+4.5%
|
40−45
−4.5%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 41
−9.8%
|
45−50
+9.8%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 61
+5.2%
|
55−60
−5.2%
|
Hitman 3 | 40−45
−14.3%
|
45−50
+14.3%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 30−35
−12.5%
|
35−40
+12.5%
|
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 24−27
−12%
|
27−30
+12%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 40
+14.3%
|
35−40
−14.3%
|
Watch Dogs: Legion | 27−30
−10.7%
|
30−35
+10.7%
|
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 36
+5.9%
|
30−35
−5.9%
|
Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 24−27
−16.7%
|
27−30
+16.7%
|
Battlefield 5 | 54
−5.6%
|
55−60
+5.6%
|
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 35−40
−13.2%
|
40−45
+13.2%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 24−27
−12%
|
27−30
+12%
|
Far Cry 5 | 43
−2.3%
|
40−45
+2.3%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 38
−18.4%
|
45−50
+18.4%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 53
−9.4%
|
55−60
+9.4%
|
Hitman 3 | 40−45
−14.3%
|
45−50
+14.3%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 30−35
−12.5%
|
35−40
+12.5%
|
Metro Exodus | 24
−4.2%
|
24−27
+4.2%
|
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 24−27
−12%
|
27−30
+12%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 34
−2.9%
|
35−40
+2.9%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 45
+25%
|
35−40
−25%
|
Watch Dogs: Legion | 27−30
−10.7%
|
30−35
+10.7%
|
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 21
−61.9%
|
30−35
+61.9%
|
Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 24−27
−16.7%
|
27−30
+16.7%
|
Battlefield 5 | 49
−16.3%
|
55−60
+16.3%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 24−27
−12%
|
27−30
+12%
|
Far Cry 5 | 39
−12.8%
|
40−45
+12.8%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 35
−28.6%
|
45−50
+28.6%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 36
−61.1%
|
55−60
+61.1%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 26
−38.5%
|
35−40
+38.5%
|
Watch Dogs: Legion | 27−30
−10.7%
|
30−35
+10.7%
|
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 21−24
−13.6%
|
24−27
+13.6%
|
Hitman 3 | 24−27
−12.5%
|
27−30
+12.5%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 20−22
−15%
|
21−24
+15%
|
Metro Exodus | 14
−7.1%
|
14−16
+7.1%
|
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 10−12
−18.2%
|
12−14
+18.2%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 20
−5%
|
21−24
+5%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 10−11 | no data |
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 17
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 10−12
−27.3%
|
14−16
+27.3%
|
Battlefield 5 | 33
−12.1%
|
35−40
+12.1%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 9−10
−11.1%
|
10−11
+11.1%
|
Far Cry 5 | 27
+0%
|
27−30
+0%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 25
−24%
|
30−35
+24%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 23
−43.5%
|
30−35
+43.5%
|
Watch Dogs: Legion | 9−10
−22.2%
|
10−12
+22.2%
|
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 10−11
−20%
|
12−14
+20%
|
Hitman 3 | 14−16
−14.3%
|
16−18
+14.3%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 10−12
−9.1%
|
12−14
+9.1%
|
Metro Exodus | 7
−28.6%
|
9−10
+28.6%
|
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 8−9
−12.5%
|
9−10
+12.5%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 9
−11.1%
|
10−11
+11.1%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 16
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 8−9
−25%
|
10−11
+25%
|
Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 6−7
−16.7%
|
7−8
+16.7%
|
Battlefield 5 | 15
−26.7%
|
18−20
+26.7%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
Far Cry 5 | 13
+0%
|
12−14
+0%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 12
−33.3%
|
16−18
+33.3%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 6
−267%
|
21−24
+267%
|
Watch Dogs: Legion | 5−6
−20%
|
6−7
+20%
|
Advantages and disadvantages
Performance rating | 14.48 | 16.24 |
Recency | 7 October 2014 | 4 June 2012 |
Memory bus width | 192 | 256 |
Pipelines / CUDA cores | 1280 | 2688 |
Judging by the results of synthetic and gaming tests, Technical City recommends
since it shows better performance.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Competitors of GeForce GTX 970M by AMD
According to our data, the closest AMD alternative to GeForce GTX 970M is Radeon RX Vega M GL / 870, which is slower by 4% and lower by 9 positions in our ranking.
Here are some closest AMD rivals to GeForce GTX 970M:
Competitors of GeForce GTX 680M SLI by AMD
The nearest GeForce GTX 680M SLI's AMD equivalent is Radeon RX Vega M GH, which is faster by 2% and higher by 3 positions in our performance rating.
Here are some closest AMD rivals to GeForce GTX 680M SLI:
Similar GPU comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.