Qualcomm Adreno 680 vs AMD Radeon 520

Place in performance ranking	837	762
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Value for money	2.01	no data
Architecture	GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)	no data
GPU code name	Oland	no data
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	21 March 2017 (7 years old)	6 December 2018 (5 years old)
Current price	$140	no data

Value for money

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Technical specs

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	320	no data
Core clock speed	1030 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	1,040 million	no data
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	50 Watt	7 Watt
Texture fill rate	20.60	no data
Floating-point performance	659.2 gflops	no data

Size and compatibility

Information on Radeon 520 and Qualcomm Adreno 680 compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Interface	PCIe 3.0 x8	no data
Supplementary power connectors	None	no data

Memory

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 type	DDR3, GDDR5	no data
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	no data
Memory bus width	64 Bit	no data
Memory clock speed	2250 MHz	no data
Memory bandwidth	16 GB/s	no data
Shared memory	-	+

Video outputs and ports

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 Connectors	1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA	no data
HDMI	+	no data

API support

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

DirectX	12.0	12
Shader Model	5.0	no data
OpenGL	4.6	no data
OpenCL	1.2	no data
Vulkan	+	no data

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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.

Radeon 520 2.03

Qualcomm Adreno 680 2.74
+35%

Qualcomm Adreno 680 outperforms Radeon 520 by 35% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

Radeon 520 787
+11%

Qualcomm Adreno 680 709

Radeon 520 outperforms Qualcomm Adreno 680 by 11% in Passmark.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

Radeon 520 2017
+4.2%

Qualcomm Adreno 680 1936

Radeon 520 outperforms Qualcomm Adreno 680 by 4% in 3DMark 11 Performance GPU.

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

−20%

18−21
+20%

Performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

5−6

+0%

5−6

+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	2−3 −100%	4−5 +100%
Battlefield 5	3−4 −100%	6−7 +100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	10−12 −9.1%	12−14 +9.1%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Far Cry 5	2−3 −100%	4−5 +100%
Far Cry New Dawn	1−2 −200%	3−4 +200%
Forza Horizon 4	4−5 −75%	7−8 +75%
Hitman 3	3−4 −66.7%	5−6 +66.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn	3−4 −33.3%	4−5 +33.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2	5−6 −20%	6−7 +20%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	8−9 −12.5%	9−10 +12.5%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	2−3 −100%	4−5 +100%
Battlefield 5	3−4 −100%	6−7 +100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	10−12 −9.1%	12−14 +9.1%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Far Cry 5	2−3 −100%	4−5 +100%
Far Cry New Dawn	1−2 −200%	3−4 +200%
Forza Horizon 4	4−5 −75%	7−8 +75%
Hitman 3	3−4 −66.7%	5−6 +66.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn	3−4 −33.3%	4−5 +33.3%
Metro Exodus	3−4 −33.3%	4−5 +33.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2	5−6 −20%	6−7 +20%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	8−9 −12.5%	9−10 +12.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10 +66.7%	6−7 −66.7%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	2−3 −100%	4−5 +100%
Battlefield 5	3−4 −100%	6−7 +100%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Far Cry 5	2−3 −100%	4−5 +100%
Far Cry New Dawn	1−2 −200%	3−4 +200%
Forza Horizon 4	4−5 −75%	7−8 +75%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	6 +0%	6−7 +0%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 −25%	5−6 +25%
Hitman 3	5−6 −20%	6−7 +20%
Horizon Zero Dawn	9−10 −11.1%	10−11 +11.1%
Metro Exodus	0−1	1−2
Red Dead Redemption 2	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Far Cry 5	3−4 −33.3%	4−5 +33.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	2−3 −50%	3−4 +50%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Hitman 3	2−3 −50%	3−4 +50%
Horizon Zero Dawn	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	0−1	1−2
Far Cry 5	3−4 −33.3%	4−5 +33.3%
Far Cry New Dawn	5−6 −20%	6−7 +20%

This is how Radeon 520 and Qualcomm Adreno 680 compete in popular games:

1080p resolution:

Qualcomm Adreno 680 is 20% faster than Radeon 520

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 Radeon 520 is 66.7% faster than the Qualcomm Adreno 680.
in Far Cry New Dawn, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Qualcomm Adreno 680 is 200% faster than the Radeon 520.

All in all, in popular games: