UHD Graphics 750 vs Qualcomm Adreno 680

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Qualcomm Adreno 680 with UHD Graphics 750, including specs and performance data.

Qualcomm Adreno 680
2018
7 Watt
2.19

UHD Graphics 750 outperforms Qualcomm Adreno 680 by a whopping 101% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking867669
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency21.9720.60
Architectureno dataGeneration 12.1 (2020−2021)
GPU code nameno dataRocket Lake GT1
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date6 December 2018 (6 years ago)30 March 2021 (3 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 coresno data256
Core clock speedno data300 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1300 MHz
Manufacturing process technology7 nm14 nm+++
Power consumption (TDP)7 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rateno data20.80
Floating-point processing powerno data0.6656 TFLOPS
ROPsno data8
TMUsno data16

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).

Interfaceno dataRing Bus
Widthno dataIGP

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 typeno dataSystem Shared
Maximum RAM amountno dataSystem Shared
Memory bus widthno dataSystem Shared
Memory clock speedno dataSystem Shared
Shared memory+no data

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 dataNo outputs

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX1212 (12_1)
Shader Modelno data6.4
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data3.0
Vulkan-1.2

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.

Qualcomm Adreno 680 2.19
UHD Graphics 750 4.40
+101%

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.

Qualcomm Adreno 680 861
UHD Graphics 750 1733
+101%

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 Preset

Atomic Heart 6−7
−66.7%
10−11
+66.7%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
−22.2%
10−12
+22.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−80%
9−10
+80%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 6−7
−66.7%
10−11
+66.7%
Battlefield 5 6−7
−183%
16−18
+183%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
−22.2%
10−12
+22.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−80%
9−10
+80%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−267%
10−12
+267%
Fortnite 9−10
−167%
24−27
+167%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
−81.8%
20−22
+81.8%
Forza Horizon 5 2−3
−350%
9−10
+350%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−12
−54.5%
16−18
+54.5%
Valorant 40−45
−40%
55−60
+40%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 6−7
−66.7%
10−11
+66.7%
Battlefield 5 6−7
−183%
16−18
+183%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
−22.2%
10−12
+22.2%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 40−45
−78.6%
75−80
+78.6%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−80%
9−10
+80%
Dota 2 21−24
−95.7%
45−50
+95.7%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−267%
10−12
+267%
Fortnite 9−10
−167%
24−27
+167%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
−81.8%
20−22
+81.8%
Forza Horizon 5 2−3
−350%
9−10
+350%
Grand Theft Auto V 4−5
−250%
14−16
+250%
Metro Exodus 3−4
−167%
8−9
+167%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−12
−54.5%
16−18
+54.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
−71.4%
12−14
+71.4%
Valorant 40−45
−40%
55−60
+40%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 6−7
−183%
16−18
+183%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
−22.2%
10−12
+22.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−80%
9−10
+80%
Dota 2 21−24
−95.7%
45−50
+95.7%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−267%
10−12
+267%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
−81.8%
20−22
+81.8%
Forza Horizon 5 2−3
−350%
9−10
+350%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−12
−54.5%
16−18
+54.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
−71.4%
12−14
+71.4%
Valorant 40−45
−40%
55−60
+40%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 9−10
−167%
24−27
+167%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 14−16
−113%
30−35
+113%
Grand Theft Auto V 0−1 4−5
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
−100%
30−33
+100%
Valorant 16−18
−171%
45−50
+171%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 3−4
−100%
6−7
+100%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−167%
8−9
+167%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
−100%
10−11
+100%
Forza Horizon 5 1−2
−500%
6−7
+500%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4
−133%
7−8
+133%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 4−5
−100%
8−9
+100%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−6.7%
16−18
+6.7%
Valorant 10−12
−90.9%
21−24
+90.9%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 1−2
Dota 2 5−6
−100%
10−11
+100%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%
Forza Horizon 4 0−1 5−6
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 3−4
−66.7%
5−6
+66.7%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

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

  • in Forza Horizon 5, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the UHD Graphics 750 is 500% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • UHD Graphics 750 is ahead in 52 tests (93%)
  • there's a draw in 4 tests (7%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.19 4.40
Recency 6 December 2018 30 March 2021
Chip lithography 7 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 7 Watt 15 Watt

Qualcomm Adreno 680 has a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 114.3% lower power consumption.

UHD Graphics 750, on the other hand, has a 100.9% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 2 years.

The UHD Graphics 750 is our recommended choice as it beats the Qualcomm Adreno 680 in performance tests.

Be aware that Qualcomm Adreno 680 is a notebook card while UHD Graphics 750 is a desktop one.

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.


Qualcomm Adreno 680
Adreno 680
Intel UHD Graphics 750
UHD Graphics 750

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.


3.4 38 votes

Rate Qualcomm Adreno 680 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 405 votes

Rate UHD Graphics 750 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Qualcomm Adreno 680 or UHD Graphics 750, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.