Qualcomm Adreno 690 vs Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile with Qualcomm Adreno 690, including specs and performance data.

RTX 3000 Mobile
2019
6 GB GDDR6, 80 Watt
26.20
+440%

RTX 3000 Mobile outperforms Qualcomm Adreno 690 by a whopping 440% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking191605
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation6.44no data
ArchitectureTuring (2018−2021)no data
GPU code nameN19E-Q1no data
Market segmentMobile workstationLaptop
Release date27 May 2019 (5 years ago)6 December 2018 (5 years ago)
Current price$2393 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores1920no data
Core clock speed945 MHzno data
Boost clock speed1380 MHzno data
Number of transistors10,800 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology12 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)80 Watt7 Watt
Texture fill rate198.7no data

Form factor & compatibility

Information on Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile and Qualcomm Adreno 690 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 sizelargeno data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16no 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 typeGDDR6no data
Maximum RAM amount6 GBno data
Memory bus width192 Bitno data
Memory clock speed14000 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth448.0 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
G-SYNC support+no data

Supported technologies

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

VR Ready+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_1)12
Shader Model6.5no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL1.2no data
Vulkan1.2.131no data
CUDA7.5no data

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.

RTX 3000 Mobile 26.20
+440%
Qualcomm Adreno 690 4.85

Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile outperforms Qualcomm Adreno 690 by 440% 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%

RTX 3000 Mobile 10116
+895%
Qualcomm Adreno 690 1017

Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile outperforms Qualcomm Adreno 690 by 895% 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%

RTX 3000 Mobile 19879
+583%
Qualcomm Adreno 690 2912

Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile outperforms Qualcomm Adreno 690 by 583% 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%

RTX 3000 Mobile 14842
+406%
Qualcomm Adreno 690 2933

Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile outperforms Qualcomm Adreno 690 by 406% 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%

RTX 3000 Mobile 91394
+447%
Qualcomm Adreno 690 16708

Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile outperforms Qualcomm Adreno 690 by 447% in 3DMark Cloud Gate GPU.

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 HD97
+288%
25
−288%
4K88
+450%
16−18
−450%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 40−45 no data

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 77 no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 45−50 no data
Battlefield 5 85−90 no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 50−55 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45 no data
Far Cry 5 60−65 no data
Far Cry New Dawn 65−70 no data
Forza Horizon 4 110−120 no data
Hitman 3 50−55 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 100−110 no data
Metro Exodus 80−85 no data
Red Dead Redemption 2 65−70 no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 90−95 no data
Watch Dogs: Legion 70−75 no data

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 62 no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 45−50 no data
Battlefield 5 85−90 no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 50−55 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45 no data
Far Cry 5 60−65 no data
Far Cry New Dawn 65−70 no data
Forza Horizon 4 110−120 no data
Hitman 3 50−55 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 100−110 no data
Metro Exodus 43 no data
Red Dead Redemption 2 65−70 no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 90−95 no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 109 no data
Watch Dogs: Legion 70−75 no data

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 39 no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 45−50 no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 50−55 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45 no data
Far Cry 5 60−65 no data
Forza Horizon 4 110−120 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 100−110 no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 90−95 no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 56 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 50−55 no data
Far Cry New Dawn 55−60 no data

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 27−30 no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 24−27
+550%
4−5
−550%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35−40 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18 no data
Far Cry 5 45−50 no data
Forza Horizon 4 50−55 no data
Hitman 3 30−35 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 50−55 no data
Metro Exodus 50−55 no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 55−60
+480%
10−11
−480%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35 no data
Watch Dogs: Legion 20−22 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 21−24 no data
Hitman 3 21−24 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−33 no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 18−20 no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30 no data

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 16−18 no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 14−16 no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 14−16 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8 no data
Far Cry 5 14−16 no data
Forza Horizon 4 35−40 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−33 no data
Metro Exodus 24−27 no data
Watch Dogs: Legion 12−14 no data

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24 no data

This is how RTX 3000 Mobile and Qualcomm Adreno 690 compete in popular games:

  • RTX 3000 Mobile is 288% faster in 1080p
  • RTX 3000 Mobile is 450% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 26.20 4.85
Recency 27 May 2019 6 December 2018
Chip lithography 12 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 80 Watt 7 Watt

The Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Qualcomm Adreno 690 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile is a mobile workstation card while Qualcomm Adreno 690 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 RTX 3000 Mobile
Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile
Qualcomm Adreno 690
Adreno 690

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.


4.1 246 votes

Rate Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.3 3 votes

Rate Qualcomm Adreno 690 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.