Radeon 680M vs Quadro T1000 Max-Q

#ad
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregated performance score

T1000 Max-Q
2019
4 GB GDDR5
17.38
+2.7%

Quadro T1000 Max-Q outperforms Radeon 680M by a minimal 3% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking292299
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
ArchitectureTuring (2018−2021)RDNA 2 (2020−2022)
GPU code nameN19P-Q1RDNA 2 Rembrandt
Market segmentMobile workstationLaptop
Release date27 May 2019 (4 years ago)4 January 2022 (2 years ago)

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 cores768768
Core clock speed795 / 1230 MHzno data
Boost clock speed1455 MHz2400 MHz
Number of transistors4,700 million13,100 million
Manufacturing process technology12 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)35 - 40 Watt45 Watt
Texture fill rate75.60115.2

Form factor & compatibility

Information on Quadro T1000 Max-Q and Radeon 680M 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 sizemedium sizedno data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x8
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeGDDR5System Shared
Maximum RAM amount4 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width128 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed8000 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth80 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 outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.66.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL3.02.0
Vulkan1.21.2
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.

T1000 Max-Q 17.38
+2.7%
Radeon 680M 16.93

Quadro T1000 Max-Q outperforms Radeon 680M by 3% based on our aggregated 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%

T1000 Max-Q 6726
+9.1%
Radeon 680M 6166

Quadro T1000 Max-Q outperforms Radeon 680M by 9% in Passmark.

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 HD35−40
−5.7%
37
+5.7%
1440p16−18
−6.3%
17
+6.3%
4K10−12
−10%
11
+10%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
−44.4%
39
+44.4%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 35−40
+2.9%
35−40
−2.9%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−33
−26.7%
38
+26.7%
Battlefield 5 55−60
+3.5%
55−60
−3.5%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 45−50
+2.3%
40−45
−2.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
−7.4%
29
+7.4%
Far Cry 5 45−50
+18.4%
38
−18.4%
Far Cry New Dawn 45−50
+23.7%
38
−23.7%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+1.7%
55−60
−1.7%
Hitman 3 45−50
−14.3%
56
+14.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40
+0%
37
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 27−30
+3.6%
27−30
−3.6%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 35−40
+19.4%
31
−19.4%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−18.2%
39
+18.2%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 35−40
+2.9%
35−40
−2.9%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−33
−3.3%
31
+3.3%
Battlefield 5 55−60
+3.5%
55−60
−3.5%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 45−50
+2.3%
40−45
−2.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+28.6%
21
−28.6%
Far Cry 5 45−50
+28.6%
35
−28.6%
Far Cry New Dawn 45−50
+30.6%
36
−30.6%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+1.7%
55−60
−1.7%
Hitman 3 45−50
+4.3%
47
−4.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40
+23.3%
30
−23.3%
Metro Exodus 27−30
+22.7%
22
−22.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2 27−30
+3.6%
27−30
−3.6%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 35−40
+42.3%
26
−42.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
−8.1%
40
+8.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+0%
33
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 35−40
+2.9%
35−40
−2.9%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−33
+11.1%
27
−11.1%
Battlefield 5 55−60
+3.5%
55−60
−3.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+58.8%
17
−58.8%
Far Cry 5 45−50
+32.4%
34
−32.4%
Far Cry New Dawn 45−50
+42.4%
33
−42.4%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+1.7%
55−60
−1.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
+54.2%
24
−54.2%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+83.3%
18
−83.3%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 24−27
+4%
24−27
−4%
Hitman 3 27−30
+0%
28
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Metro Exodus 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+8.3%
12−14
−8.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 21−24
+4.8%
21−24
−4.8%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Battlefield 5 35−40
+2.7%
35−40
−2.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
−10%
11
+10%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+38.1%
21
−38.1%
Far Cry New Dawn 30−35
+3.1%
30−35
−3.1%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+3%
30−35
−3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+5.9%
17
−5.9%
Watch Dogs: Legion 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Hitman 3 16−18
+14.3%
14
−14.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Metro Exodus 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+30.8%
13
−30.8%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 9−10
+12.5%
8−9
−12.5%
Battlefield 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−33.3%
4
+33.3%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+7.7%
12−14
−7.7%
Far Cry New Dawn 16−18
+6.3%
16−18
−6.3%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

This is how T1000 Max-Q and Radeon 680M compete in popular games:

  • Radeon 680M is 6% faster in 1080p
  • Radeon 680M is 6% faster in 1440p
  • Radeon 680M is 10% faster in 4K

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

  • in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the T1000 Max-Q is 83% faster than the Radeon 680M.
  • in Cyberpunk 2077, with 1080p resolution and the Low Preset, the Radeon 680M is 44% faster than the T1000 Max-Q.

All in all, in popular games:

  • T1000 Max-Q is ahead in 42 tests (62%)
  • Radeon 680M is ahead in 9 tests (13%)
  • there's a draw in 17 tests (25%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 17.38 16.93
Recency 27 May 2019 4 January 2022
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB System Shared
Chip lithography 12 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 45 Watt

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Quadro T1000 Max-Q and Radeon 680M.

Be aware that Quadro T1000 Max-Q is a mobile workstation card while Radeon 680M 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 T1000 Max-Q
Quadro T1000 Max-Q
AMD Radeon 680M
Radeon 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.


3.8 17 votes

Rate Quadro T1000 Max-Q on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3 807 votes

Rate Radeon 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.