GeForce GT 710 vs Qualcomm Adreno 690

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Qualcomm Adreno 690 with GeForce GT 710, including specs and performance data.

Qualcomm Adreno 690
2018
7 Watt
2.50
+68.9%

Qualcomm Adreno 690 outperforms GT 710 by an impressive 69% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking823974
Place by popularitynot in top-10060
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.04
Power efficiency26.455.78
Architectureno dataKepler 2.0 (2013−2015)
GPU code nameno dataGK208
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date6 December 2018 (6 years ago)27 March 2014 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$34.99

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

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 data192
Core clock speedno data954 MHz
Number of transistorsno data915 million
Manufacturing process technology5 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)7 Watt19 Watt
Maximum GPU temperatureno data95 °C
Texture fill rateno data15.26
Floating-point processing powerno data0.3663 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).

Bus supportno dataPCI Express 2.0
Interfaceno dataPCIe 2.0 x8
Lengthno data145 mm
Heightno data2.713" (6.9 cm)
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 dataDDR3
Maximum RAM amountno data2 GB
Memory bus widthno data64 Bit
Memory clock speedno data1.8 GB/s
Memory bandwidthno data14.4 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 dataDual Link DVI-DHDMIVGA
Multi monitor supportno data3 displays
HDMI-+
HDCP-+
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536
Audio input for HDMIno dataInternal

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

3D Vision-+
PureVideo-+
PhysX-+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX1212 (11_0)
Shader Modelno data5.1
OpenGLno data4.5
OpenCLno data1.2
Vulkan-1.1.126
CUDA-+

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 690 2.50
+68.9%
GT 710 1.48

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 690 1052
+68.6%
GT 710 624

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

Qualcomm Adreno 690 2933
+210%
GT 710 947

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

Qualcomm Adreno 690 16708
+130%
GT 710 7270

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 HD22
+175%
8
−175%
1440p5−6
+66.7%
3
−66.7%
4K10−12
+42.9%
7
−42.9%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data4.37
1440pno data11.66
4Kno data5.00

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 6−7
+100%
3−4
−100%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Hogwarts Legacy 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%
Counter-Strike 2 6−7
+100%
3−4
−100%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+20%
5
−20%
Fortnite 12−14
+160%
5−6
−160%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+62.5%
8−9
−62.5%
Forza Horizon 5 4−5 0−1
Hogwarts Legacy 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+30%
10−11
−30%
Valorant 40−45
+22.9%
35−40
−22.9%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%
Counter-Strike 2 6−7
+100%
3−4
−100%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 45−50
+48.5%
30−35
−48.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Dota 2 43
+115%
20
−115%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+50%
4
−50%
Fortnite 12−14
+160%
5−6
−160%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+62.5%
8−9
−62.5%
Forza Horizon 5 4−5 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 6−7
−50%
9
+50%
Hogwarts Legacy 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Metro Exodus 4−5
+33.3%
3
−33.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+30%
10−11
−30%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 19
+280%
5
−280%
Valorant 40−45
+22.9%
35−40
−22.9%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Dota 2 35
+94.4%
18
−94.4%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+50%
4
−50%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+62.5%
8−9
−62.5%
Hogwarts Legacy 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+30%
10−11
−30%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9
+200%
3
−200%
Valorant 40−45
+22.9%
35−40
−22.9%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 12−14
+160%
5−6
−160%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 18−20
+80%
10−11
−80%
Grand Theft Auto V 1−2 0−1
Metro Exodus 1−2 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
+60%
14−16
−60%
Valorant 21−24
+188%
8−9
−188%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Hogwarts Legacy 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%

4K
High Preset

Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+6.7%
14−16
−6.7%
Valorant 12−14
+62.5%
8−9
−62.5%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Dota 2 7−8
+0%
7
+0%
Far Cry 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

This is how Qualcomm Adreno 690 and GT 710 compete in popular games:

  • Qualcomm Adreno 690 is 175% faster in 1080p
  • Qualcomm Adreno 690 is 67% faster in 1440p
  • Qualcomm Adreno 690 is 43% faster in 4K

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

  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the Qualcomm Adreno 690 is 280% faster.
  • in Grand Theft Auto V, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the GT 710 is 50% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Qualcomm Adreno 690 is ahead in 44 tests (90%)
  • GT 710 is ahead in 1 test (2%)
  • there's a draw in 4 tests (8%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.50 1.48
Recency 6 December 2018 27 March 2014
Chip lithography 5 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 7 Watt 19 Watt

Qualcomm Adreno 690 has a 68.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 460% more advanced lithography process, and 171.4% lower power consumption.

The Qualcomm Adreno 690 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 710 in performance tests.

Be aware that Qualcomm Adreno 690 is a notebook card while GeForce GT 710 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 690
Adreno 690
NVIDIA GeForce GT 710
GeForce GT 710

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.


2.5 11 votes

Rate Qualcomm Adreno 690 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 4472 votes

Rate GeForce GT 710 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Qualcomm Adreno 690 or GeForce GT 710, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.