Radeon 680M vs R7 265

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R7 265 with Radeon 680M, including specs and performance data.

R7 265
2014
4 GB GDDR5, 150 Watt
9.63

680M outperforms R7 265 by a moderate 14% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking476449
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation4.62no data
Power efficiency4.8916.71
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2012−2020)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025)
GPU code namePitcairnRembrandt+
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Designreferenceno data
Release date13 February 2014 (11 years ago)3 January 2023 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$149 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

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 cores1024768
Core clock speedno data2000 MHz
Boost clock speed925 MHz2200 MHz
Number of transistors2,800 million13,100 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)150 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate59.20105.6
Floating-point processing power1.894 TFLOPS3.379 TFLOPS
ROPs3232
TMUs6448
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).

Bus supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x8
Length210 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1 x 6-pinNone

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 width256 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1400 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth179.2 GB/sno data
Shared memory-+

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPortPortable Device Dependent
Eyefinity+-
HDMI+-

Supported technologies

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

CrossFire+-
FreeSync+-
DDMA audio+no data

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.16.7
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.0
Vulkan-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.

R7 265 9.63
Radeon 680M 10.96
+13.8%

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.

R7 265 5220
Radeon 680M 6865
+31.5%

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 HD30−35
−23.3%
37
+23.3%
1440p14−16
−21.4%
17
+21.4%
4K9−10
−22.2%
11
+22.2%

Cost per frame, $

1080p4.97no data
1440p10.64no data
4K16.56no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 38
+0%
38
+0%
God of War 34
+0%
34
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 28
+0%
28
+0%
Far Cry 5 38
+0%
38
+0%
Fortnite 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 52
+0%
52
+0%
God of War 23
+0%
23
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Valorant 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 21
+0%
21
+0%
Dota 2 71
+0%
71
+0%
Far Cry 5 35
+0%
35
+0%
Fortnite 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 46
+0%
46
+0%
God of War 18
+0%
18
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 36
+0%
36
+0%
Metro Exodus 23
+0%
23
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 40
+0%
40
+0%
Valorant 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 18
+0%
18
+0%
Dota 2 61
+0%
61
+0%
Far Cry 5 33
+0%
33
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
God of War 13
+0%
13
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24
+0%
24
+0%
Valorant 146
+0%
146
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 17
+0%
17
+0%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Valorant 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10
+0%
10
+0%
Far Cry 5 21
+0%
21
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
God of War 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 17
+0%
17
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Metro Exodus 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 13
+0%
13
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4
+0%
4
+0%
Dota 2 18
+0%
18
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
God of War 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%

This is how R7 265 and Radeon 680M compete in popular games:

  • Radeon 680M is 23% faster in 1080p
  • Radeon 680M is 21% faster in 1440p
  • Radeon 680M is 22% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 65 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 9.63 10.96
Recency 13 February 2014 3 January 2023
Chip lithography 28 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 150 Watt 50 Watt

Radeon 680M has a 13.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 366.7% more advanced lithography process, and 200% lower power consumption.

The Radeon 680M is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 265 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R7 265 is a desktop graphics card while Radeon 680M is a notebook one.

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 R7 265
Radeon R7 265
AMD Radeon 680M
Radeon 680M

Other comparisons

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.


3.2 382 votes

Rate Radeon R7 265 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2 1103 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R7 265 or Radeon 680M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.