Qualcomm Adreno 685 vs Radeon R5 M330

Place in performance ranking	930	773
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	0.66
Architecture	GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)	no data
GPU code name	Exo Pro DDR3	no data
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	7 May 2015 (9 years ago)	6 December 2018 (5 years ago)
Current price	no data	$1429

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Detailed specifications

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 cores	320	no data
Compute units	5	no data
Core clock speed	1030 MHz	no data
Boost clock speed	1030 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	690 million	no data
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	18 Watt	7 Watt
Texture fill rate	20.60	no data
Floating-point performance	659.2 gflops	no data

Form factor & compatibility

Information on Radeon R5 M330 and Qualcomm Adreno 685 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.

Bus support	PCIe 3.0	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x8	no data
Supplementary power connectors	None	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	DDR3	no data
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	no data
Memory bus width	64 Bit	no data
Memory clock speed	1000 MHz	no data
Memory bandwidth	14.4 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

No outputs

no data

Supported technologies

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

AppAcceleration	-	no data
Enduro	-	no data
HD3D	+	no data
PowerTune	+	no data
DualGraphics	1	no data
TrueAudio	-	no data
ZeroCore	+	no data
Switchable graphics	1	no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	DirectX® 12	12
Shader Model	5.0	no data
OpenGL	4.4	no data
OpenCL	Not Listed	no data
Vulkan	+	no data
Mantle	+	no 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.

R5 M330 1.54

Qualcomm Adreno 685 2.69
+74.7%

Qualcomm Adreno 685 outperforms Radeon R5 M330 by 75% based on our aggregate 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%

R5 M330 595

Qualcomm Adreno 685 892
+49.9%

Qualcomm Adreno 685 outperforms Radeon R5 M330 by 50% 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%

R5 M330 1689

Qualcomm Adreno 685 1927
+14.1%

Qualcomm Adreno 685 outperforms Radeon R5 M330 by 14% in 3DMark 11 Performance GPU.

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

−55.6%

14−16
+55.6%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

2−3

−150%

5−6
+150%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	2−3 −150%	5−6 +150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 −75%	7−8 +75%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −150%	5−6 +150%
Far Cry 5	2−3 −150%	5−6 +150%
Far Cry New Dawn	4−5 −75%	7−8 +75%
Forza Horizon 4	6−7 −83.3%	10−12 +83.3%
Hitman 3	3−4 −100%	6−7 +100%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−11 −80%	18−20 +80%
Red Dead Redemption 2	3−4 −100%	6−7 +100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	6−7 −100%	12−14 +100%
Watch Dogs: Legion	9−10 −77.8%	16−18 +77.8%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	2−3 −150%	5−6 +150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 −75%	7−8 +75%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −150%	5−6 +150%
Far Cry 5	2−3 −150%	5−6 +150%
Far Cry New Dawn	4−5 −75%	7−8 +75%
Forza Horizon 4	6−7 −83.3%	10−12 +83.3%
Hitman 3	3−4 −100%	6−7 +100%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−11 −80%	18−20 +80%
Red Dead Redemption 2	3−4 −100%	6−7 +100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	6−7 −100%	12−14 +100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	4−5 −75%	7−8 +75%
Watch Dogs: Legion	9−10 −77.8%	16−18 +77.8%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	2−3 −150%	5−6 +150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 −75%	7−8 +75%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −150%	5−6 +150%
Far Cry 5	2−3 −150%	5−6 +150%
Forza Horizon 4	6−7 −83.3%	10−12 +83.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−11 −80%	18−20 +80%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	6−7 −100%	12−14 +100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	4−5 −75%	7−8 +75%
Watch Dogs: Legion	9−10 −77.8%	16−18 +77.8%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

3−4

−100%

6−7
+100%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	2−3 −100%	4−5 +100%
Far Cry New Dawn	1−2 −200%	3−4 +200%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2 −100%	2−3 +100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 −150%	5−6 +150%
Cyberpunk 2077	0−1	1−2
Far Cry 5	2−3 −100%	4−5 +100%
Forza Horizon 4	2−3 −100%	4−5 +100%
Hitman 3	4−5 −100%	8−9 +100%
Horizon Zero Dawn	4−5 −75%	7−8 +75%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	1−2 −100%	2−3 +100%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

3−4

−100%

6−7
+100%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn	1−2 −100%	2−3 +100%
Horizon Zero Dawn	1−2 −200%	3−4 +200%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2 −100%	2−3 +100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	0−1	1−2
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	0−1	1−2
Far Cry 5	0−1	1−2
Horizon Zero Dawn	1−2 −200%	3−4 +200%
Metro Exodus	2−3 −150%	5−6 +150%