Radeon 680M vs Pro 555X

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon Pro 555X with Radeon 680M, including specs and performance data.

Pro 555X
2018
4 GB GDDR5, 75 Watt
8.39

680M outperforms Pro 555X by an impressive 90% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking503337
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency7.7922.25
ArchitectureGCN 4.0 (2016−2020)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code namePolaris 21Rembrandt+
Market segmentMobile workstationLaptop
Release date16 July 2018 (6 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 cores768768
Core clock speed907 MHz2000 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2200 MHz
Number of transistors3,000 million13,100 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate43.54105.6
Floating-point processing power1.393 TFLOPS3.379 TFLOPS
ROPs1632
TMUs4848
Ray Tracing Coresno data12

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 sizelargeno data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x8PCIe 4.0 x8
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeGDDR5System Shared
Maximum RAM amount4 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width128 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1275 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth81.6 GB/sno 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 ConnectorsNo outputsPortable 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.

DirectX12 (12_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.46.7
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.02.0
Vulkan1.2.1311.3

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 555X 8.39
Radeon 680M 15.98
+90.5%

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 555X 3235
Radeon 680M 6166
+90.6%

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 HD18−20
−106%
37
+106%
1440p8−9
−113%
17
+113%
4K5−6
−120%
11
+120%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
−200%
39
+200%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 21−24
−85.7%
35−40
+85.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14
−217%
38
+217%
Battlefield 5 24−27
−128%
55−60
+128%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16−18
−106%
35−40
+106%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
−123%
29
+123%
Far Cry 5 18−20
−116%
40−45
+116%
Far Cry New Dawn 21−24
−104%
45−50
+104%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
−96.4%
110−120
+96.4%
Hitman 3 16−18
−100%
32
+100%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50
−79.2%
85−90
+79.2%
Metro Exodus 24−27
−140%
60−65
+140%
Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
−104%
45−50
+104%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27−30
−104%
55−60
+104%
Watch Dogs: Legion 55−60
−46.6%
85−90
+46.6%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 21−24
−85.7%
35−40
+85.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14
−158%
31
+158%
Battlefield 5 24−27
−128%
55−60
+128%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16−18
−106%
35−40
+106%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
−61.5%
21
+61.5%
Far Cry 5 18−20
−116%
40−45
+116%
Far Cry New Dawn 21−24
−104%
45−50
+104%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
−96.4%
110−120
+96.4%
Hitman 3 16−18
−87.5%
30
+87.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50
−79.2%
85−90
+79.2%
Metro Exodus 24−27
−140%
60−65
+140%
Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
−104%
45−50
+104%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27−30
−67.9%
47
+67.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
−66.7%
40−45
+66.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion 55−60
−46.6%
85−90
+46.6%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 21−24
−85.7%
35−40
+85.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14
−125%
27
+125%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16−18
−106%
35−40
+106%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
−30.8%
17
+30.8%
Far Cry 5 18−20
−116%
40−45
+116%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
−96.4%
110−120
+96.4%
Hitman 3 16−18
−68.8%
27
+68.8%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50
+11.6%
43
−11.6%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27−30
−42.9%
40
+42.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+0%
24
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 55−60
+222%
18
−222%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
−104%
45−50
+104%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 16−18
−106%
30−35
+106%
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14
−108%
27−30
+108%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 8−9
−125%
18−20
+125%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5
−275%
14−16
+275%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8−9
−138%
18−20
+138%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−175%
11
+175%
Far Cry 5 10−11
−100%
20−22
+100%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
−176%
90−95
+176%
Hitman 3 12−14
−66.7%
20−22
+66.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20
−94.4%
35−40
+94.4%
Metro Exodus 10−12
−191%
30−35
+191%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
−238%
27
+238%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
−113%
17
+113%
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55
−98.1%
100−110
+98.1%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
−107%
27−30
+107%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 7−8
−143%
16−18
+143%
Far Cry New Dawn 6−7
−117%
12−14
+117%
Hitman 3 4−5
−225%
12−14
+225%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
−178%
85−90
+178%
Metro Exodus 6−7
−200%
18−20
+200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
−160%
13
+160%

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 4−5
−125%
9−10
+125%
Forza Horizon 4 10−11
−140%
24−27
+140%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 4−5
−250%
14
+250%
Watch Dogs: Legion 3−4
−133%
7−8
+133%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
−87.5%
14−16
+87.5%

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

  • Radeon 680M is 106% faster in 1080p
  • Radeon 680M is 113% faster in 1440p
  • Radeon 680M is 120% 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 555X is 222% faster.
  • in Cyberpunk 2077, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Radeon 680M is 300% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Pro 555X is ahead in 2 tests (3%)
  • Radeon 680M is ahead in 69 tests (96%)
  • there's a draw in 1 test (1%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 8.39 15.98
Recency 16 July 2018 3 January 2023
Chip lithography 14 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 50 Watt

Radeon 680M has a 90.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 133.3% more advanced lithography process, and 50% lower power consumption.

The Radeon 680M is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon Pro 555X in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon Pro 555X 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.

Vote for your favorite

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


AMD Radeon Pro 555X
Radeon Pro 555X
AMD Radeon 680M
Radeon 680M

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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

Community ratings

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


3.8 166 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2 939 votes

Rate Radeon 680M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

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