Radeon 680M vs Pro 460

Place in the ranking	486	352
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	17.58	20.49
Architecture	GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)	RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code name	Baffin	Rembrandt+
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Laptop
Release date	30 October 2016 (8 years ago)	3 January 2023 (1 year 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	1024	768
Core clock speed	850 MHz	2000 MHz
Boost clock speed	907 MHz	2200 MHz
Number of transistors	3,000 million	13,100 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	35 Watt	50 Watt
Texture fill rate	58.05	105.6
Floating-point processing power	1.858 TFLOPS	3.379 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	32
TMUs	64	48
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	12

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).

Laptop size	large	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x8	PCIe 4.0 x8
Supplementary power connectors	None	None

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	System Shared
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	System Shared
Memory bus width	128 Bit	System Shared
Memory clock speed	1270 MHz	System Shared
Memory bandwidth	81.28 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

Portable Device Dependent

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_0)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	6.4	6.7
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	2.0	2.0
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.3

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.

Pro 460 8.96

Radeon 680M 14.92
+66.5%

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.

Pro 460 3452

Radeon 680M 5746
+66.5%

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.

Pro 460 6749

Radeon 680M 10371
+53.7%

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

Pro 460 19234

Radeon 680M 34600
+79.9%

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.

Pro 460 4584

Radeon 680M 6865
+49.8%

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.

Pro 460 27064

Radeon 680M 43225
+59.7%

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	40 +8.1%	37 −8.1%
1440p	10−12 −70%	17 +70%
4K	6−7 −83.3%	11 +83.3%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

14−16

−179%

39
+179%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	21−24 −77.3%	35−40 +77.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	12−14 −192%	38 +192%
Battlefield 5	27−30 −111%	55−60 +111%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	18−20 −94.4%	35−40 +94.4%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 −107%	29 +107%
Far Cry 5	20−22 −105%	40−45 +105%
Far Cry New Dawn	24−27 −88%	45−50 +88%
Forza Horizon 4	60−65 −83.3%	110−120 +83.3%
Hitman 3	16−18 −88.2%	32 +88.2%
Horizon Zero Dawn	50−55 −72%	85−90 +72%
Metro Exodus	27−30 −114%	60−65 +114%
Red Dead Redemption 2	24−27 −88%	45−50 +88%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	27−30 −96.6%	55−60 +96.6%
Watch Dogs: Legion	60−65 −41.7%	85−90 +41.7%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	21−24 −77.3%	35−40 +77.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	12−14 −138%	31 +138%
Battlefield 5	27−30 −111%	55−60 +111%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	18−20 −94.4%	35−40 +94.4%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 −50%	21 +50%
Far Cry 5	20−22 −105%	40−45 +105%
Far Cry New Dawn	24−27 −88%	45−50 +88%
Forza Horizon 4	60−65 −83.3%	110−120 +83.3%
Hitman 3	16−18 −76.5%	30 +76.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn	50−55 −72%	85−90 +72%
Metro Exodus	27−30 −114%	60−65 +114%
Red Dead Redemption 2	24−27 −88%	45−50 +88%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	27−30 −62.1%	47 +62.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	24−27 −60%	40−45 +60%
Watch Dogs: Legion	60−65 −41.7%	85−90 +41.7%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	21−24 −77.3%	35−40 +77.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	12−14 −108%	27 +108%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	18−20 −94.4%	35−40 +94.4%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 −21.4%	17 +21.4%
Far Cry 5	20−22 −105%	40−45 +105%
Forza Horizon 4	60−65 −83.3%	110−120 +83.3%
Hitman 3	16−18 −58.8%	27 +58.8%
Horizon Zero Dawn	50−55 +16.3%	43 −16.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	27−30 −37.9%	40 +37.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	17 −41.2%	24 +41.2%
Watch Dogs: Legion	60−65 +233%	18 −233%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

24−27

−88%

45−50
+88%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	16−18 −94.1%	30−35 +94.1%
Far Cry New Dawn	14−16 −92.9%	27−30 +92.9%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	9−10 −100%	18−20 +100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	5−6 −200%	14−16 +200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	9−10 −111%	18−20 +111%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −175%	11 +175%
Far Cry 5	10−11 −100%	20−22 +100%
Forza Horizon 4	35−40 −154%	90−95 +154%
Hitman 3	12−14 −66.7%	20−22 +66.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn	18−20 −84.2%	35−40 +84.2%
Metro Exodus	12−14 −167%	30−35 +167%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	10−11 −170%	27 +170%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	8−9 −113%	17 +113%
Watch Dogs: Legion	55−60 −84.2%	100−110 +84.2%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

14−16

−93.3%

27−30
+93.3%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	8−9 −113%	16−18 +113%
Far Cry New Dawn	6−7 −117%	12−14 +117%
Hitman 3	5−6 −160%	12−14 +160%
Horizon Zero Dawn	35−40 −147%	85−90 +147%
Metro Exodus	7−8 −157%	18−20 +157%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	6−7 −117%	13 +117%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	5−6 −100%	10−11 +100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	4−5 −100%	8−9 +100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 −125%	9−10 +125%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −300%	4 +300%
Far Cry 5	5−6 −80%	9−10 +80%
Forza Horizon 4	10−12 −118%	24−27 +118%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	5−6 −180%	14 +180%
Watch Dogs: Legion	3−4 −133%	7−8 +133%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

9−10

−66.7%

14−16
+66.7%

This is how Pro 460 and Radeon 680M compete in popular games:

Pro 460 is 8% faster in 1080p
Radeon 680M is 70% faster in 1440p
Radeon 680M is 83% faster in 4K

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

in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Pro 460 is 233% faster.
in Cyberpunk 2077, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Radeon 680M is 300% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Pro 460 is ahead in 2 tests (3%)
Radeon 680M is ahead in 70 tests (97%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	8.96	14.92
Recency	30 October 2016	3 January 2023
Chip lithography	14 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	35 Watt	50 Watt

Pro 460 has 42.9% lower power consumption.

Radeon 680M, on the other hand, has a 66.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, and a 133.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon 680M is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon Pro 460 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon Pro 460 is a mobile workstation card while Radeon 680M is a mobile workstation one.

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