Qualcomm Adreno 685 vs Radeon HD 6870

Place in the ranking	592	819
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.92	no data
Power efficiency	2.63	25.13
Architecture	TeraScale 2 (2009−2015)	no data
GPU code name	Barts	no data
Market segment	Desktop	Laptop
Design	reference	no data
Release date	21 October 2010 (14 years ago)	6 December 2018 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$239	no data

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 cores	1120	no data
Boost clock speed	900 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	1,700 million	no data
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	151 Watt	7 Watt
Texture fill rate	50.40	no data
Floating-point processing power	2.016 TFLOPS	no data
ROPs	32	no data
TMUs	56	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).

Bus support	PCIe 2.0 x16	no data
Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	no data
Length	220 mm	no data
Width	2-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	2x 6-pin	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	1 GB	no data
Memory bus width	256 Bit	no data
Memory clock speed	1050 MHz	no data
Memory bandwidth	134.4 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	2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 2x mini-DisplayPort	no data
Eyefinity	+	-
HDMI	+	-

Supported technologies

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

CrossFire

API compatibility

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

DirectX	DirectX® 11	12
Shader Model	5.0	no data
OpenGL	4.4	no data
OpenCL	1.2	no data

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.

HD 6870 5.74
+126%

Qualcomm Adreno 685 2.54

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.

HD 6870 2216
+126%

Qualcomm Adreno 685 979

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.

HD 6870 4218
+119%

Qualcomm Adreno 685 1927

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:

900p	61 +154%	24−27 −154%
Full HD	61 +154%	24−27 −154%
1200p	39 +144%	16−18 −144%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

3.92

no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

9−10
+80%

5−6

−80%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	14−16 +66.7%	9−10 −66.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	7−8	0−1
Battlefield 5	16−18 +300%	4−5 −300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	12−14 +71.4%	7−8 −71.4%
Cyberpunk 2077	9−10 +80%	5−6 −80%
Far Cry 5	12−14 +160%	5−6 −160%
Far Cry New Dawn	16−18 +129%	7−8 −129%
Forza Horizon 4	35−40 +185%	12−14 −185%
Hitman 3	12−14 +71.4%	7−8 −71.4%
Horizon Zero Dawn	35−40 +71.4%	21−24 −71.4%
Metro Exodus	14−16 +650%	2−3 −650%
Red Dead Redemption 2	16−18 +167%	6−7 −167%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	20−22 +66.7%	12−14 −66.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion	45−50 +28.9%	35−40 −28.9%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	14−16 +66.7%	9−10 −66.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	7−8	0−1
Battlefield 5	16−18 +300%	4−5 −300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	12−14 +71.4%	7−8 −71.4%
Cyberpunk 2077	9−10 +80%	5−6 −80%
Far Cry 5	12−14 +160%	5−6 −160%
Far Cry New Dawn	16−18 +129%	7−8 −129%
Forza Horizon 4	35−40 +185%	12−14 −185%
Hitman 3	12−14 +71.4%	7−8 −71.4%
Horizon Zero Dawn	35−40 +71.4%	21−24 −71.4%
Metro Exodus	14−16 +650%	2−3 −650%
Red Dead Redemption 2	16−18 +167%	6−7 −167%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	20−22 +66.7%	12−14 −66.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	18−20 +35.7%	14−16 −35.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion	45−50 +28.9%	35−40 −28.9%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	14−16 +66.7%	9−10 −66.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	7−8	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	12−14 +71.4%	7−8 −71.4%
Cyberpunk 2077	9−10 +80%	5−6 −80%
Far Cry 5	12−14 +160%	5−6 −160%
Forza Horizon 4	35−40 +185%	12−14 −185%
Hitman 3	12−14 +71.4%	7−8 −71.4%
Horizon Zero Dawn	35−40 +71.4%	21−24 −71.4%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	20−22 +66.7%	12−14 −66.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	18−20 +35.7%	14−16 −35.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion	45−50 +28.9%	35−40 −28.9%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

16−18
+167%

6−7

−167%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	10−12 +175%	4−5 −175%
Far Cry New Dawn	9−10 +125%	4−5 −125%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Far Cry 5	7−8 +133%	3−4 −133%
Forza Horizon 4	16−18 +129%	7−8 −129%
Hitman 3	10−11 +25%	8−9 −25%
Horizon Zero Dawn	12−14 +85.7%	7−8 −85.7%
Metro Exodus	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	1−2	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 +125%	16−18 −125%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

10−11
+66.7%

6−7

−66.7%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Far Cry New Dawn	4−5 +100%	2−3 −100%
Hitman 3	2−3	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	12−14 +160%	5−6 −160%
Metro Exodus	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	2−3	0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Cyberpunk 2077	0−1	0−1
Far Cry 5	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Forza Horizon 4	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%
Watch Dogs: Legion	2−3	0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

6−7
+50%

4−5

−50%

This is how HD 6870 and Qualcomm Adreno 685 compete in popular games:

HD 6870 is 154% faster in 900p
HD 6870 is 154% faster in 1080p
HD 6870 is 144% faster in 1200p

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

in Metro Exodus, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the HD 6870 is 650% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Without exception, HD 6870 surpassed Qualcomm Adreno 685 in all 57 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	5.74	2.54
Recency	21 October 2010	6 December 2018
Chip lithography	40 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	151 Watt	7 Watt

HD 6870 has a 126% higher aggregate performance score.

Qualcomm Adreno 685, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 8 years, a 471.4% more advanced lithography process, and 2057.1% lower power consumption.

The Radeon HD 6870 is our recommended choice as it beats the Qualcomm Adreno 685 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon HD 6870 is a desktop card while Qualcomm Adreno 685 is a notebook one.

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