NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M vs AMD Radeon Pro 555

#ad
Buy
VS

Combined performance score

Pro 555
8.10

GeForce GTX 680M outperforms Radeon Pro 555 by 2% in our combined benchmark results.

General info

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

Place in performance ranking476467
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Value for money1.723.43
ArchitecturePolaris (2016−2019)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code namePolaris 21N13E-GTX
Market segmentMobile workstationLaptop
Release date5 June 2017 (6 years old)4 June 2012 (11 years old)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$310.50
Current price$894 $293 (0.9x MSRP)
Value for money

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTX 680M has 99% better value for money than Pro 555.

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 cores7681344
CUDA coresno data1344
Core clock speed855 MHz720 MHz
Boost clock speedno data758 MHz
Number of transistors3,000 million3,540 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data100 Watt
Texture fill rate40.8080.6 billion/sec
Floating-point performance1,306 gflops2,038 gflops

Size and compatibility

Information on Radeon Pro 555 and GeForce GTX 680M 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.

Laptop sizelargelarge
Bus supportno dataPCI Express 3.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x8MXM-B (3.0)
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone
SLI optionsno 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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount2 GB4 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed5080 MHz1800 MHz
Memory bandwidth81.6 GB/s115.2 GB/s
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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

Technologies

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

FreeSync+no data
Optimusno data+

API support

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

DirectX12 (12_0)12 API
Shader Model6.45.1
OpenGL4.64.5
OpenCL2.01.1
Vulkan1.2.1311.1.126
CUDAno 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.

Pro 555 8.10
GTX 680M 8.29
+2.3%

GeForce GTX 680M outperforms Radeon Pro 555 by 2% in our combined 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%

Pro 555 3140
GTX 680M 3215
+2.4%

GeForce GTX 680M outperforms Radeon Pro 555 by 2% 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%

Pro 555 5185
GTX 680M 5898
+13.7%

GeForce GTX 680M outperforms Radeon Pro 555 by 14% in 3DMark 11 Performance GPU.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

Pro 555 3721
GTX 680M 4049
+8.8%

GeForce GTX 680M outperforms Radeon Pro 555 by 9% in 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

Pro 555 22624
GTX 680M 27684
+22.4%

GeForce GTX 680M outperforms Radeon Pro 555 by 22% in 3DMark Cloud Gate GPU.

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

Benchmark coverage: 9%

Pro 555 11389
+13.9%
GTX 680M 10001

Radeon Pro 555 outperforms GeForce GTX 680M by 14% in GeekBench 5 OpenCL.

Unigine Heaven 3.0

This is an old DirectX 11 benchmark using Unigine, a 3D game engine by eponymous Russian company. It displays a fantasy medieval town sprawling over several flying islands. Version 3.0 was released in 2012, and in 2013 it was superseded by Heaven 4.0, which introduced several slight improvements, including a newer version of Unigine.

Benchmark coverage: 4%

Pro 555 42
GTX 680M 58
+37.6%

GeForce GTX 680M outperforms Radeon Pro 555 by 38% in Unigine Heaven 3.0.

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:

900p65−70
−3.1%
67
+3.1%
Full HD32
−100%
64
+100%
4K13
+8.3%
12−14
−8.3%

Performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 20
+17.6%
16−18
−17.6%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−12
−9.1%
12−14
+9.1%
Battlefield 5 27−30
−3.7%
27−30
+3.7%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
−4.5%
21−24
+4.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 26
+30%
20−22
−30%
Far Cry New Dawn 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 31
+6.9%
27−30
−6.9%
Hitman 3 20−22
−5%
21−24
+5%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
−6.3%
16−18
+6.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
−7.1%
14−16
+7.1%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 21
+16.7%
18−20
−16.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 16
−6.3%
16−18
+6.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−12
−9.1%
12−14
+9.1%
Battlefield 5 27−30
−3.7%
27−30
+3.7%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
−4.5%
21−24
+4.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 24
+20%
20−22
−20%
Far Cry New Dawn 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 26
−11.5%
27−30
+11.5%
Hitman 3 20−22
−5%
21−24
+5%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
−6.3%
16−18
+6.3%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
−7.1%
14−16
+7.1%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 23
+35.3%
16−18
−35.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−12
−9.1%
12−14
+9.1%
Battlefield 5 27−30
−3.7%
27−30
+3.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 22
+10%
20−22
−10%
Far Cry New Dawn 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 18
−61.1%
27−30
+61.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14
−21.4%
16−18
+21.4%
Watch Dogs: Legion 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Hitman 3 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Metro Exodus 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Battlefield 5 10−12
−9.1%
12−14
+9.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
Hitman 3 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Metro Exodus 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Battlefield 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

This is how Pro 555 and GTX 680M compete in popular games:

900p resolution:

  • GTX 680M is 3.1% faster than Pro 555

1080p resolution:

  • GTX 680M is 100% faster than Pro 555

4K resolution:

  • Pro 555 is 8.3% faster than GTX 680M

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 Pro 555 is 35.3% faster than the GTX 680M.
  • in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GTX 680M is 61.1% faster than the Pro 555.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Pro 555 is ahead in 7 tests (10%)
  • GTX 680M is ahead in 25 tests (37%)
  • there's a draw in 36 tests (53%)

Advantages and disadvantages


Performance score 8.10 8.29
Recency 5 June 2017 4 June 2012
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 14 nm 28 nm

We couldn't decide between Radeon Pro 555 and GeForce GTX 680M. The differences in performance seem too small.

Be aware that Radeon Pro 555 is a mobile workstation card while GeForce GTX 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.

User ratings

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


AMD Radeon Pro 555
Radeon Pro 555
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M
GeForce GTX 680M

Similar GPU comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

User ratings: view and submit

Here you can see the user rating of the graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.6 82 votes

Rate AMD Radeon Pro 555 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 41 vote

Rate NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions and comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.