GeForce GTX 680M SLI vs Quadro P5200

Place in the ranking	182	334
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	21.58	no data
Architecture	Pascal (2016−2021)	Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code name	GP104	N13E-GTX
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Laptop
Release date	21 February 2018 (6 years ago)	4 June 2012 (12 years ago)

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	2560	2688
Core clock speed	1556 MHz	720 MHz
Boost clock speed	1746 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	7,200 million	no data
Manufacturing process technology	16 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	no data
Texture fill rate	279.4	no data
Floating-point processing power	8.94 TFLOPS	no data
ROPs	64	no data
TMUs	160	no 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 size	large	large
Interface	MXM-B (3.0)	no data
Supplementary power connectors	None	no data
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	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	16 GB	2x 4 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	2x 256 Bit
Memory clock speed	1800 MHz	3600 MHz
Memory bandwidth	230.4 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

no data

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 (12_1)	11
Shader Model	6.4	no data
OpenGL	4.6	no data
OpenCL	1.2	no data
Vulkan	1.2.131	-
CUDA	6.1	+

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.

Quadro P5200 30.94
+89.5%

GTX 680M SLI 16.33

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.

Quadro P5200 25100
+129%

GTX 680M SLI 10952

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.

Quadro P5200 65844
+102%

GTX 680M SLI 32635

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	250−260 +88%	133 −88%
Full HD	114 +18.8%	96 −18.8%
4K	46 +91.7%	24−27 −91.7%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	60−65 +118%	27−30 −118%
Cyberpunk 2077	65−70 +97%	30−35 −97%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	90−95 +71.7%	50−55 −71.7%
Counter-Strike 2	60−65 +118%	27−30 −118%
Cyberpunk 2077	65−70 +97%	30−35 −97%
Forza Horizon 4	140−150 +112%	65−70 −112%
Forza Horizon 5	80−85 +86.4%	40−45 −86.4%
Metro Exodus	75−80 +75.6%	45−50 −75.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2	65−70 +62.5%	40−45 −62.5%
Valorant	120−130 +86.6%	65−70 −86.6%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	90−95 +71.7%	50−55 −71.7%
Counter-Strike 2	60−65 +118%	27−30 −118%
Cyberpunk 2077	65−70 +97%	30−35 −97%
Dota 2	100−110 +76.3%	55−60 −76.3%
Far Cry 5	85−90 +50%	55−60 −50%
Fortnite	140−150 +61.5%	90−95 −61.5%
Forza Horizon 4	140−150 +112%	65−70 −112%
Forza Horizon 5	80−85 +86.4%	40−45 −86.4%
Grand Theft Auto V	100−110 +74.6%	55−60 −74.6%
Metro Exodus	75−80 +75.6%	45−50 −75.6%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	216 +86.2%	110−120 −86.2%
Red Dead Redemption 2	65−70 +62.5%	40−45 −62.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	100−110 +108%	50−55 −108%
Valorant	120−130 +86.6%	65−70 −86.6%
World of Tanks	270−280 +20.1%	229 −20.1%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	90−95 +71.7%	50−55 −71.7%
Counter-Strike 2	60−65 +118%	27−30 −118%
Cyberpunk 2077	65−70 +97%	30−35 −97%
Dota 2	100−110 +76.3%	55−60 −76.3%
Far Cry 5	85−90 +50%	55−60 −50%
Forza Horizon 4	140−150 +112%	65−70 −112%
Forza Horizon 5	80−85 +86.4%	40−45 −86.4%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	84 −38.1%	110−120 +38.1%
Valorant	120−130 +86.6%	65−70 −86.6%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	55−60 +120%	24−27 −120%
Grand Theft Auto V	55−60 +124%	24−27 −124%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 +11.5%	150−160 −11.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2	30−33 +100%	14−16 −100%
World of Tanks	200−210 +77.2%	110−120 −77.2%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	60−65 +79.4%	30−35 −79.4%
Cyberpunk 2077	27−30 +123%	12−14 −123%
Far Cry 5	95−100 +133%	40−45 −133%
Forza Horizon 4	85−90 +112%	40−45 −112%
Forza Horizon 5	50−55 +96.2%	24−27 −96.2%
Metro Exodus	70−75 +89.2%	35−40 −89.2%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	50−55 +127%	21−24 −127%
Valorant	90−95 +114%	40−45 −114%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +62.5%	8−9 −62.5%
Dota 2	55−60 +104%	27−30 −104%
Grand Theft Auto V	55−60 +104%	27−30 −104%
Metro Exodus	24−27 +108%	12−14 −108%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	93 +89.8%	45−50 −89.8%
Red Dead Redemption 2	20−22 +81.8%	10−12 −81.8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	55−60 +104%	27−30 −104%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	35−40 +119%	16−18 −119%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +62.5%	8−9 −62.5%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 +140%	5−6 −140%
Dota 2	55−60 +104%	27−30 −104%
Far Cry 5	40−45 +105%	21−24 −105%
Fortnite	40−45 +116%	18−20 −116%
Forza Horizon 4	50−55 +108%	24−27 −108%
Forza Horizon 5	27−30 +115%	12−14 −115%
Valorant	45−50 +142%	18−20 −142%

This is how Quadro P5200 and GTX 680M SLI compete in popular games:

Quadro P5200 is 88% faster in 900p
Quadro P5200 is 19% faster in 1080p
Quadro P5200 is 92% faster in 4K

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

in Valorant, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Quadro P5200 is 142% faster.
in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GTX 680M SLI is 38% faster.

All in all, in popular games: