Qualcomm Adreno 680 vs Radeon 540X

Place in the ranking	717	866
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	5.14	21.90
Architecture	GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)	no data
GPU code name	Lexa	no data
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	5 September 2018 (6 years ago)	6 December 2018 (6 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	512	no data
Core clock speed	980 MHz	no data
Boost clock speed	1046 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	2,200 million	no data
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	50 Watt	7 Watt
Texture fill rate	33.47	no data
Floating-point processing power	1.071 TFLOPS	no data
ROPs	16	no data
TMUs	32	no data

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).

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

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 type	GDDR5	no data
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	no data
Memory bus width	64 Bit	no data
Memory clock speed	1500 MHz	no data
Memory bandwidth	48 GB/s	no data
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 Connectors

No outputs

no data

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_0)	12
Shader Model	6.4	no data
OpenGL	4.6	no data
OpenCL	2.0	no data
Vulkan	1.2.131	-

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.

Radeon 540X 3.59
+67.8%

Qualcomm Adreno 680 2.14

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.

Radeon 540X 1437
+67.7%

Qualcomm Adreno 680 857

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.

Radeon 540X 4097
+112%

Qualcomm Adreno 680 1936

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

19
+90%

10−12

−90%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +9.1%	10−12 −9.1%
Cyberpunk 2077	9 +50%	6−7 −50%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	10−11 +100%	5−6 −100%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +9.1%	10−12 −9.1%
Cyberpunk 2077	8−9 +33.3%	6−7 −33.3%
Forza Horizon 4	23 +91.7%	12−14 −91.7%
Forza Horizon 5	15	0−1
Metro Exodus	16 +433%	3−4 −433%
Red Dead Redemption 2	19 +111%	9−10 −111%
Valorant	8−9 +100%	4−5 −100%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	10−11 +100%	5−6 −100%
Counter-Strike 2	5 −120%	10−12 +120%
Cyberpunk 2077	8−9 +33.3%	6−7 −33.3%
Dota 2	26 +420%	5−6 −420%
Far Cry 5	19 +35.7%	14−16 −35.7%
Fortnite	21−24 +75%	12−14 −75%
Forza Horizon 4	20 +66.7%	12−14 −66.7%
Forza Horizon 5	5−6	0−1
Grand Theft Auto V	15 +200%	5−6 −200%
Metro Exodus	8 +167%	3−4 −167%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	49 +133%	21−24 −133%
Red Dead Redemption 2	12−14 +33.3%	9−10 −33.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	12−14 +44.4%	9−10 −44.4%
Valorant	11 +83.3%	6−7 −83.3%
World of Tanks	55 +31%	40−45 −31%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	10−11 +100%	5−6 −100%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +9.1%	10−12 −9.1%
Cyberpunk 2077	8−9 +33.3%	6−7 −33.3%
Dota 2	44 +780%	5−6 −780%
Far Cry 5	19 +35.7%	14−16 −35.7%
Forza Horizon 4	17 +41.7%	12−14 −41.7%
Forza Horizon 5	5−6	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	30−35 +57.1%	21−24 −57.1%
Valorant	8−9 +100%	4−5 −100%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	2−3	0−1
Grand Theft Auto V	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	24−27 +73.3%	14−16 −73.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
World of Tanks	24−27 +73.3%	14−16 −73.3%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Far Cry 5	8−9 +33.3%	6−7 −33.3%
Forza Horizon 4	4−5 +100%	2−3 −100%
Forza Horizon 5	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	7−8 +40%	5−6 −40%
Valorant	10−12 +37.5%	8−9 −37.5%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	16−18 +6.7%	14−16 −6.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	10−12 +83.3%	6−7 −83.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 +6.7%	14−16 −6.7%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Dota 2	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Far Cry 5	4−5 +100%	2−3 −100%
Fortnite	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Forza Horizon 4	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Forza Horizon 5	2−3	0−1
Valorant	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%

This is how Radeon 540X and Qualcomm Adreno 680 compete in popular games:

Radeon 540X is 90% faster in 1080p

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

in Dota 2, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Radeon 540X is 780% faster.
in Counter-Strike 2, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the Qualcomm Adreno 680 is 120% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Radeon 540X is ahead in 44 tests (90%)
Qualcomm Adreno 680 is ahead in 1 test (2%)
there's a draw in 4 tests (8%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	3.59	2.14
Recency	5 September 2018	6 December 2018
Chip lithography	14 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	50 Watt	7 Watt

Radeon 540X has a 67.8% higher aggregate performance score.

Qualcomm Adreno 680, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 months, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 614.3% lower power consumption.

The Radeon 540X is our recommended choice as it beats the Qualcomm Adreno 680 in performance tests.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.