GeForce RTX 5090 Mobile vs Qualcomm Adreno 685

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Qualcomm Adreno 685 and GeForce RTX 5090 Mobile, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Qualcomm Adreno 685
2018
7 Watt
2.50

RTX 5090 Mobile outperforms Qualcomm Adreno 685 by a whopping 2805% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking83918
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency24.8953.28
Architectureno dataBlackwell 2.0 (2025)
GPU code nameno dataGB203
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date6 December 2018 (6 years ago)2025 (recently)

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 data10496
Core clock speedno data990 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1515 MHz
Number of transistorsno data45,600 million
Manufacturing process technology7 nm4 nm
Power consumption (TDP)7 Watt95 Watt
Texture fill rateno data496.9
Floating-point processing powerno data31.8 TFLOPS
ROPsno data128
TMUsno data328
Tensor Coresno data328
Ray Tracing Coresno data82

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 dataPCIe 5.0 x16

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 dataGDDR7
Maximum RAM amountno data24 GB
Memory bus widthno data256 Bit
Memory clock speedno data2000 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data811.5 GB/s
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 data1x HDMI 2.1b, 3x DisplayPort 2.1b
HDMI-+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX1212 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Modelno data6.8
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data3.0
Vulkan-1.4
CUDA-10.1
DLSS-+

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 685 2.50
RTX 5090 Mobile 72.62
+2805%

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 685 975
RTX 5090 Mobile 28280
+2801%

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
−2733%
170−180
+2733%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
−2789%
260−270
+2789%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−2700%
140−150
+2700%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 6−7
−2733%
170−180
+2733%
Battlefield 5 7−8
−2757%
200−210
+2757%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
−2789%
260−270
+2789%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−2700%
140−150
+2700%
Far Cry 5 4−5
−2650%
110−120
+2650%
Fortnite 10−12
−2627%
300−310
+2627%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
−2400%
300−310
+2400%
Forza Horizon 5 3−4
−2733%
85−90
+2733%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
−2400%
300−310
+2400%
Valorant 40−45
−2757%
1200−1250
+2757%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 6−7
−2733%
170−180
+2733%
Battlefield 5 7−8
−2757%
200−210
+2757%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
−2789%
260−270
+2789%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 45−50
−2772%
1350−1400
+2772%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−2700%
140−150
+2700%
Dota 2 24−27
−2700%
700−750
+2700%
Far Cry 5 4−5
−2650%
110−120
+2650%
Fortnite 10−12
−2627%
300−310
+2627%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
−2400%
300−310
+2400%
Forza Horizon 5 3−4
−2733%
85−90
+2733%
Grand Theft Auto V 6−7
−2733%
170−180
+2733%
Metro Exodus 4−5
−2650%
110−120
+2650%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
−2400%
300−310
+2400%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
−2775%
230−240
+2775%
Valorant 40−45
−2757%
1200−1250
+2757%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 7−8
−2757%
200−210
+2757%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
−2789%
260−270
+2789%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−2700%
140−150
+2700%
Dota 2 24−27
−2700%
700−750
+2700%
Far Cry 5 4−5
−2650%
110−120
+2650%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
−2400%
300−310
+2400%
Forza Horizon 5 3−4
−2733%
85−90
+2733%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
−2400%
300−310
+2400%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
−2775%
230−240
+2775%
Valorant 40−45
−2757%
1200−1250
+2757%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 10−12
−2627%
300−310
+2627%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 16−18
−2547%
450−500
+2547%
Grand Theft Auto V 1−2
−2600%
27−30
+2600%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
−2547%
450−500
+2547%
Valorant 21−24
−2757%
600−650
+2757%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 3−4
−2733%
85−90
+2733%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−2650%
55−60
+2650%
Far Cry 5 4−5
−2650%
110−120
+2650%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
−2733%
170−180
+2733%
Forza Horizon 5 2−3
−2650%
55−60
+2650%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
−2650%
110−120
+2650%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 4−5
−2650%
110−120
+2650%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 2−3
−2650%
55−60
+2650%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−2567%
400−450
+2567%
Valorant 12−14
−2400%
300−310
+2400%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−2600%
27−30
+2600%
Dota 2 6−7
−2733%
170−180
+2733%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−2733%
85−90
+2733%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
−2600%
27−30
+2600%
Forza Horizon 5 0−1 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 3−4
−2733%
85−90
+2733%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 3−4
−2733%
85−90
+2733%

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.50 72.62
Chip lithography 7 nm 4 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 7 Watt 95 Watt

Qualcomm Adreno 685 has 1257.1% lower power consumption.

RTX 5090 Mobile, on the other hand, has a 2804.8% higher aggregate performance score, and a 75% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce RTX 5090 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Qualcomm Adreno 685 in performance tests.

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 685
Adreno 685
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 Mobile
GeForce RTX 5090

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.


3.7 15 votes

Rate Qualcomm Adreno 685 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 60 votes

Rate GeForce RTX 5090 Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Qualcomm Adreno 685 or GeForce RTX 5090 Mobile, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.