Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile vs Qualcomm Adreno 680
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Qualcomm Adreno 680 with RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile, including specs and performance data.
Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile outperforms Qualcomm Adreno 680 by a whopping 1066% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 913 | 253 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 23.37 | 54.51 |
| Architecture | no data | Ada Lovelace (2022−2024) |
| GPU code name | no data | AD107 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Mobile workstation |
| Release date | 6 December 2018 (6 years ago) | 26 February 2024 (1 year 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 | no data | 2048 |
| Core clock speed | no data | 1485 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 2025 MHz |
| Number of transistors | no data | 18,900 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 7 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 7 Watt | 35 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 129.6 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 8.294 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | no data | 32 |
| TMUs | no data | 64 |
| Tensor Cores | no data | 64 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 16 |
| L1 Cache | no data | 2 MB |
| L2 Cache | no data | 12 MB |
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 | no data | medium sized |
| Interface | no data | PCIe 4.0 x8 |
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 | no data | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | no data | 4 GB |
| Memory bus width | no data | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | no data | 2000 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 128.0 GB/s |
| Shared memory | + | - |
| Resizable BAR | - | + |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
| Display Connectors | no data | Portable Device Dependent |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | no data | 6.8 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | no data | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | - | 1.3 |
| CUDA | - | 8.9 |
| DLSS | - | + |
Synthetic benchmarks
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.
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.
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 5−6
−1000%
|
55−60
+1000%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−1025%
|
45−50
+1025%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 6−7
−983%
|
65−70
+983%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 5−6
−1000%
|
55−60
+1000%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−1025%
|
45−50
+1025%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 7−8
−1043%
|
80−85
+1043%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 6−7
−983%
|
65−70
+983%
|
| Fortnite | 10−11
−1000%
|
110−120
+1000%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−12
−991%
|
120−130
+991%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 4−5
−1025%
|
45−50
+1025%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 12−14
−983%
|
130−140
+983%
|
| Valorant | 40−45
−1025%
|
450−500
+1025%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 6−7
−983%
|
65−70
+983%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 5−6
−1000%
|
55−60
+1000%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 40−45
−1063%
|
500−550
+1063%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−1025%
|
45−50
+1025%
|
| Dota 2 | 21−24
−1030%
|
260−270
+1030%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 7−8
−1043%
|
80−85
+1043%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 6−7
−983%
|
65−70
+983%
|
| Fortnite | 10−11
−1000%
|
110−120
+1000%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−12
−991%
|
120−130
+991%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 4−5
−1025%
|
45−50
+1025%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 4−5
−1025%
|
45−50
+1025%
|
| Metro Exodus | 4−5
−1025%
|
45−50
+1025%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 12−14
−983%
|
130−140
+983%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 8−9
−1025%
|
90−95
+1025%
|
| Valorant | 40−45
−1025%
|
450−500
+1025%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 6−7
−983%
|
65−70
+983%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−1025%
|
45−50
+1025%
|
| Dota 2 | 21−24
−1030%
|
260−270
+1030%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 7−8
−1043%
|
80−85
+1043%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 6−7
−983%
|
65−70
+983%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−12
−991%
|
120−130
+991%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 12−14
−983%
|
130−140
+983%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 8−9
−1025%
|
90−95
+1025%
|
| Valorant | 40−45
−1025%
|
450−500
+1025%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 10−11
−1000%
|
110−120
+1000%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 5−6
−1000%
|
55−60
+1000%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 14−16
−1033%
|
170−180
+1033%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 21−24
−1043%
|
240−250
+1043%
|
| Valorant | 16−18
−1018%
|
190−200
+1018%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−900%
|
10−11
+900%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 5−6
−1000%
|
55−60
+1000%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 3−4
−900%
|
30−33
+900%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
−1000%
|
55−60
+1000%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 4−5
−1025%
|
45−50
+1025%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 4−5
−1025%
|
45−50
+1025%
|
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−1033%
|
170−180
+1033%
|
| Valorant | 10−12
−991%
|
120−130
+991%
|
4K
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 5−6
−1000%
|
55−60
+1000%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 1−2
−900%
|
10−11
+900%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−900%
|
10−11
+900%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 1−2
−900%
|
10−11
+900%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 3−4
−900%
|
30−33
+900%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 3−4
−900%
|
30−33
+900%
|
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 2.13 | 24.84 |
| Recency | 6 December 2018 | 26 February 2024 |
| Chip lithography | 7 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 7 Watt | 35 Watt |
Qualcomm Adreno 680 has 400% lower power consumption.
Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile, on the other hand, has a 1066.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, and a 40% more advanced lithography process.
The RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Qualcomm Adreno 680 in performance tests.
Be aware that Qualcomm Adreno 680 is a notebook graphics card while RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile is a mobile workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
