Qualcomm Adreno 680 vs Radeon R5 M240

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R5 M240 and Qualcomm Adreno 680, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

R5 M240
2014
0 MB Not Listed
1.16

Qualcomm Adreno 680 outperforms R5 M240 by an impressive 77% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1074880
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
ArchitectureGCN (2011−2017)no data
GPU code nameJet XT / Sunno data
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date1 September 2014 (10 years ago)6 December 2018 (5 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 cores320no data
Core clock speed1030 MHzno data
Number of transistors690 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data7 Watt
Texture fill rate20.60no data
Floating-point processing power0.6592 gflopsno data
ROPs8no data
TMUs20no 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 supportNot Listedno data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x8no 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 typeNot Listedno data
Maximum RAM amount0 MBno data
Memory bus widthNot Listedno data
Memory bandwidth14.4 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 outputsno data
Eyefinity+-

Supported technologies

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

AppAcceleration+-
HD3D+-
PowerTune+-
DualGraphics+-
ZeroCore+-
Switchable graphics+-

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1112
Shader Model5.1no data
OpenGL4.4no data
OpenCLNot Listedno data
Mantle+-

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.

R5 M240 1.16
Qualcomm Adreno 680 2.05
+76.7%

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.

R5 M240 449
Qualcomm Adreno 680 792
+76.4%

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.

R5 M240 1588
Qualcomm Adreno 680 1936
+21.9%

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 HD14
−71.4%
24−27
+71.4%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−66.7%
5−6
+66.7%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
−80%
9−10
+80%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−75%
7−8
+75%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−66.7%
5−6
+66.7%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−400%
5−6
+400%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
−133%
7−8
+133%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
−1300%
14−16
+1300%
Hitman 3 5−6
−60%
8−9
+60%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
−50%
21−24
+50%
Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−250%
7−8
+250%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
−71.4%
12−14
+71.4%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−18.8%
35−40
+18.8%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
−80%
9−10
+80%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−75%
7−8
+75%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−66.7%
5−6
+66.7%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−400%
5−6
+400%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
−133%
7−8
+133%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
−1300%
14−16
+1300%
Hitman 3 5−6
−60%
8−9
+60%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
−50%
21−24
+50%
Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−250%
7−8
+250%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
−71.4%
12−14
+71.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
−27.3%
14−16
+27.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−18.8%
35−40
+18.8%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
−80%
9−10
+80%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−75%
7−8
+75%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−66.7%
5−6
+66.7%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−400%
5−6
+400%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
−1300%
14−16
+1300%
Hitman 3 5−6
−60%
8−9
+60%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
−50%
21−24
+50%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
−71.4%
12−14
+71.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
−27.3%
14−16
+27.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−18.8%
35−40
+18.8%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−250%
7−8
+250%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
−300%
4−5
+300%
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%
Hitman 3 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 4−5
−75%
7−8
+75%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 0−1 2−3
Watch Dogs: Legion 5−6
−220%
16−18
+220%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−50%
6−7
+50%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 0−1 2−3

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 1−2
Far Cry 5 0−1 1−2

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Battlefield 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Battlefield 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Forza Horizon 4 0−1 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 0−1 0−1

This is how R5 M240 and Qualcomm Adreno 680 compete in popular games:

  • Qualcomm Adreno 680 is 71% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Qualcomm Adreno 680 is 1300% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Qualcomm Adreno 680 is ahead in 45 tests (80%)
  • there's a draw in 11 tests (20%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.16 2.05
Recency 1 September 2014 6 December 2018
Chip lithography 28 nm 7 nm

Qualcomm Adreno 680 has a 76.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, and a 300% more advanced lithography process.

The Qualcomm Adreno 680 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R5 M240 in performance tests.


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 R5 M240
Radeon R5 M240
Qualcomm Adreno 680
Adreno 680

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.


3.4 52 votes

Rate Radeon R5 M240 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 32 votes

Rate Qualcomm Adreno 680 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.