RTX 6000 Ada Generation vs Qualcomm Adreno 685

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Qualcomm Adreno 685 with RTX 6000 Ada Generation, including specs and performance data.

Qualcomm Adreno 685
2018
7 Watt
2.54

RTX 6000 Ada Generation outperforms Qualcomm Adreno 685 by a whopping 2740% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking82217
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data6.78
Power efficiency25.0816.62
Architectureno dataAda Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code nameno dataAD102
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date6 December 2018 (5 years ago)3 December 2022 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$6,799

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 data18176
Core clock speedno data915 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2505 MHz
Number of transistorsno data76,300 million
Manufacturing process technology7 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)7 Watt300 Watt
Texture fill rateno data1,423
Floating-point processing powerno data91.06 TFLOPS
ROPsno data192
TMUsno data568
Tensor Coresno data568
Ray Tracing Coresno data142

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 4.0 x16
Lengthno data267 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x 16-pin

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 dataGDDR6
Maximum RAM amountno data48 GB
Memory bus widthno data384 Bit
Memory clock speedno data2500 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data960.0 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 data4x DisplayPort 1.4a

API 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-1.3
CUDA-8.9

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.

Qualcomm Adreno 685 2.54
RTX 6000 Ada Generation 72.14
+2740%

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 685 979
RTX 6000 Ada Generation 27830
+2743%

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.

Qualcomm Adreno 685 1927
RTX 6000 Ada Generation 70850
+3577%

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 HD6−7
−3000%
186
+3000%
1440p5−6
−3120%
161
+3120%
4K4−5
−2825%
117
+2825%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data36.55
1440pno data42.23
4Kno data58.11

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−2700%
140−150
+2700%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
−1567%
150−160
+1567%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 130−140
Battlefield 5 4−5
−5775%
230−240
+5775%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
−1614%
120−130
+1614%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−2700%
140−150
+2700%
Far Cry 5 5−6
−2240%
110−120
+2240%
Far Cry New Dawn 7−8
−2471%
180−190
+2471%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
−1762%
240−250
+1762%
Hitman 3 7−8
−1743%
120−130
+1743%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
−1157%
260−270
+1157%
Metro Exodus 2−3
−7650%
150−160
+7650%
Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
−1950%
120−130
+1950%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
−2500%
300−350
+2500%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
−303%
150−160
+303%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
−1567%
150−160
+1567%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 130−140
Battlefield 5 4−5
−5775%
230−240
+5775%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
−1614%
120−130
+1614%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−2700%
140−150
+2700%
Far Cry 5 5−6
−2240%
110−120
+2240%
Far Cry New Dawn 7−8
−2471%
180−190
+2471%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
−1762%
240−250
+1762%
Hitman 3 7−8
−1743%
120−130
+1743%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
−1157%
260−270
+1157%
Metro Exodus 2−3
−7650%
150−160
+7650%
Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
−1950%
120−130
+1950%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
−2500%
300−350
+2500%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
−1036%
150−160
+1036%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
−303%
150−160
+303%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
−1567%
150−160
+1567%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 130−140
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
−1614%
120−130
+1614%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−2700%
140−150
+2700%
Far Cry 5 5−6
−2240%
110−120
+2240%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
−1762%
240−250
+1762%
Hitman 3 7−8
−1743%
120−130
+1743%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
−1157%
260−270
+1157%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
−2500%
300−350
+2500%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
−1757%
260
+1757%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
−303%
150−160
+303%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
−1950%
120−130
+1950%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5
−4050%
160−170
+4050%
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5
−2700%
110−120
+2700%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
−4250%
85−90
+4250%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−4000%
80−85
+4000%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−2600%
27−30
+2600%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−2700%
80−85
+2700%
Hitman 3 8−9
−1238%
100−110
+1238%
Horizon Zero Dawn 7−8
−2600%
180−190
+2600%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
−10850%
219
+10850%
Watch Dogs: Legion 16−18
−1400%
240−250
+1400%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
−1867%
110−120
+1867%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
−8700%
85−90
+8700%
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
−3350%
65−70
+3350%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
−2950%
60−65
+2950%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
−5800%
55−60
+5800%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2
−5100%
50−55
+5100%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−4900%
50−55
+4900%
Watch Dogs: Legion 0−1 45−50

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−1950%
80−85
+1950%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%
Metro Exodus 99
+0%
99
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%

4K
High Preset

Hitman 3 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 87
+0%
87
+0%
Metro Exodus 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 184
+0%
184
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Forza Horizon 4 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

This is how Qualcomm Adreno 685 and RTX 6000 Ada Generation compete in popular games:

  • RTX 6000 Ada Generation is 3000% faster in 1080p
  • RTX 6000 Ada Generation is 3120% faster in 1440p
  • RTX 6000 Ada Generation is 2825% faster in 4K

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

  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the RTX 6000 Ada Generation is 10850% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • RTX 6000 Ada Generation is ahead in 52 tests (84%)
  • there's a draw in 10 tests (16%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.54 72.14
Recency 6 December 2018 3 December 2022
Chip lithography 7 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 7 Watt 300 Watt

Qualcomm Adreno 685 has 4185.7% lower power consumption.

RTX 6000 Ada Generation, on the other hand, has a 2740.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, and a 40% more advanced lithography process.

The RTX 6000 Ada Generation is our recommended choice as it beats the Qualcomm Adreno 685 in performance tests.

Be aware that Qualcomm Adreno 685 is a notebook card while RTX 6000 Ada Generation is a 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.


Qualcomm Adreno 685
Adreno 685
NVIDIA RTX 6000 Ada Generation
RTX 6000 Ada Generation

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.


3.7 15 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 77 votes

Rate RTX 6000 Ada Generation 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.