Qualcomm Adreno 685 vs Quadro K1100M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro K1100M with Qualcomm Adreno 685, including specs and performance data.

K1100M
2013
2 GB GDDR5, 45 Watt
2.83
+11.4%

K1100M outperforms Qualcomm Adreno 685 by a moderate 11% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking798833
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.12no data
Power efficiency4.3425.02
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)no data
GPU code nameGK107no data
Market segmentMobile workstationLaptop
Release date23 July 2013 (11 years ago)6 December 2018 (6 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$109.94 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 cores384no data
Core clock speed706 MHzno data
Number of transistors1,270 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)45 Watt7 Watt
Texture fill rate22.59no data
Floating-point processing power0.5422 TFLOPSno data
ROPs16no data
TMUs32no data

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 sizemedium sizedno data
InterfaceMXM-A (3.0)no data

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 typeGDDR5no data
Maximum RAM amount2 GBno data
Memory bus width128 Bitno data
Memory clock speed700 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth44.8 GB/sno 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 ConnectorsNo outputsno data
Display Port1.2no data

Supported technologies

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

Optimus+-
3D Vision Pro+no data
Mosaic+no data
nView Display Management+no data
Optimus+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX1212
Shader Model5.1no data
OpenGL4.5no data
OpenCL1.2no data
Vulkan+-
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.

K1100M 2.83
+11.4%
Qualcomm Adreno 685 2.54

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.

K1100M 1087
+11.5%
Qualcomm Adreno 685 975

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.

K1100M 1827
Qualcomm Adreno 685 1927
+5.5%

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:

Full HD17
+21.4%
14−16
−21.4%

Cost per frame, $

1080p6.47no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+7.7%
12−14
−7.7%
Forza Horizon 5 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Metro Exodus 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Red Dead Redemption 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Valorant 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Dota 2 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+6.7%
14−16
−6.7%
Fortnite 14−16
+7.1%
14−16
−7.1%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+7.7%
12−14
−7.7%
Forza Horizon 5 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Grand Theft Auto V 8−9
+33.3%
6−7
−33.3%
Metro Exodus 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
+8.3%
24−27
−8.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9
−11.1%
10−11
+11.1%
Valorant 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
World of Tanks 50−55
+8.5%
45−50
−8.5%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Dota 2 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+6.7%
14−16
−6.7%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+7.7%
12−14
−7.7%
Forza Horizon 5 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
+8.3%
24−27
−8.3%
Valorant 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 20−22
+11.1%
18−20
−11.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
World of Tanks 18−20
+11.8%
16−18
−11.8%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Valorant 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Fortnite 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Valorant 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%

This is how K1100M and Qualcomm Adreno 685 compete in popular games:

  • K1100M is 21% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Valorant, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the K1100M is 200% faster.
  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the Qualcomm Adreno 685 is 11% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • K1100M is ahead in 34 tests (58%)
  • Qualcomm Adreno 685 is ahead in 1 test (2%)
  • there's a draw in 24 tests (41%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.83 2.54
Recency 23 July 2013 6 December 2018
Chip lithography 28 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 45 Watt 7 Watt

K1100M has a 11.4% higher aggregate performance score.

Qualcomm Adreno 685, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 5 years, a 300% more advanced lithography process, and 542.9% lower power consumption.

The Quadro K1100M is our recommended choice as it beats the Qualcomm Adreno 685 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro K1100M is a mobile workstation card while Qualcomm Adreno 685 is a mobile workstation 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 Quadro K1100M
Quadro K1100M
Qualcomm Adreno 685
Adreno 685

Other comparisons

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.


3.1 239 votes

Rate Quadro K1100M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 15 votes

Rate Qualcomm Adreno 685 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.