UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 16 EU) vs Qualcomm Adreno 680
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Qualcomm Adreno 680 and UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 16 EU), covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
Qualcomm Adreno 680 outperforms UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 16 EU) by an impressive 60% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 861 | 1013 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 21.97 | 9.59 |
| Architecture | no data | Gen. 11 (2021) |
| GPU code name | no data | Gen. 11 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 6 December 2018 (6 years ago) | 11 January 2021 (4 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 | no data | 24 |
| Core clock speed | no data | 350 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 800 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 7 nm | 10 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 7 Watt | 4.8 - 10 Watt |
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.
| Shared memory | + | + |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| Quick Sync | no data | + |
API compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 | 12_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.
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.
Average FPS across all PC games
Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:
| Full HD | 12−14
+50%
| 8
−50%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7
+50%
|
4−5
−50%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 5−6
+400%
|
1−2
−400%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7
+50%
|
4−5
−50%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 12−14
+71.4%
|
7
−71.4%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Metro Exodus | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 9−10
+28.6%
|
7−8
−28.6%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 5−6
+400%
|
1−2
−400%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7
+50%
|
4−5
−50%
|
| Dota 2 | 5−6
−20%
|
6
+20%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 14−16
+75%
|
8
−75%
|
| Fortnite | 12−14
+100%
|
6−7
−100%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 12−14
+100%
|
6
−100%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 5−6
+66.7%
|
3
−66.7%
|
| Metro Exodus | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 21−24
+40%
|
14−16
−40%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 9−10
+28.6%
|
7−8
−28.6%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 9−10
+28.6%
|
7−8
−28.6%
|
| World of Tanks | 40−45
+133%
|
18
−133%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 5−6
+400%
|
1−2
−400%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7
+50%
|
4−5
−50%
|
| Dota 2 | 5−6
−120%
|
11
+120%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 14−16
+27.3%
|
10−12
−27.3%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 12−14
+33.3%
|
9−10
−33.3%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 21−24
+40%
|
14−16
−40%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Dota 2 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 14−16
+87.5%
|
8−9
−87.5%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| World of Tanks | 14−16
+87.5%
|
8−9
−87.5%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+33.3%
|
3−4
−33.3%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 6−7
+20%
|
5−6
−20%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| Valorant | 8−9
+33.3%
|
6−7
−33.3%
|
4K
High Preset
| Dota 2 | 16−18
+6.7%
|
14−16
−6.7%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 6−7
+50%
|
4−5
−50%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 16−18
+6.7%
|
14−16
−6.7%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
| Fortnite | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Valorant | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
This is how Qualcomm Adreno 680 and UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 16 EU) compete in popular games:
- Qualcomm Adreno 680 is 50% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Battlefield 5, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Qualcomm Adreno 680 is 400% faster.
- in Dota 2, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 16 EU) is 120% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Qualcomm Adreno 680 is ahead in 36 tests (84%)
- UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 16 EU) is ahead in 2 tests (5%)
- there's a draw in 5 tests (12%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 2.23 | 1.39 |
| Recency | 6 December 2018 | 11 January 2021 |
| Chip lithography | 7 nm | 10 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 7 Watt | 4 Watt |
Qualcomm Adreno 680 has a 60.4% higher aggregate performance score, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.
UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 16 EU), on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, and 75% lower power consumption.
The Qualcomm Adreno 680 is our recommended choice as it beats the UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 16 EU) in performance tests.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
