Qualcomm Adreno 680 vs Radeon R7 (Carrizo)

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R7 (Carrizo) and Qualcomm Adreno 680, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

R7 (Carrizo)
2015
12 Watt
2.00

Qualcomm Adreno 680 outperforms R7 (Carrizo) by a small 5% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking886867
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency3.9520.84
ArchitectureGCN 1.2/2.0 (2015−2016)no data
GPU code nameCarrizono data
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date4 June 2015 (9 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 cores512no data
Boost clock speed800 MHzno data
Number of transistors2410 Millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)12-35 Watt7 Watt

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 sizemedium sizedno 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 bus width64/128 Bitno data
Shared memory++

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (FL 12_0)12

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.

R7 (Carrizo) 2.00
Qualcomm Adreno 680 2.11
+5.5%

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.

R7 (Carrizo) 1792
Qualcomm Adreno 680 1936
+8%

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 HD9
+0%
9−10
+0%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
−28.6%
9−10
+28.6%
Battlefield 5 1−2
−300%
4−5
+300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−66.7%
5−6
+66.7%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
−100%
14−16
+100%
Hitman 3 6−7
−33.3%
8−9
+33.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
−23.5%
21−24
+23.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−75%
7−8
+75%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
−20%
12−14
+20%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
−8.6%
35−40
+8.6%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
−28.6%
9−10
+28.6%
Battlefield 5 1−2
−300%
4−5
+300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−66.7%
5−6
+66.7%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
−100%
14−16
+100%
Hitman 3 6−7
−33.3%
8−9
+33.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
−23.5%
21−24
+23.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−75%
7−8
+75%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
−20%
12−14
+20%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14
+0%
14−16
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
−8.6%
35−40
+8.6%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
−28.6%
9−10
+28.6%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−66.7%
5−6
+66.7%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
−100%
14−16
+100%
Hitman 3 6−7
−33.3%
8−9
+33.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
−23.5%
21−24
+23.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
−20%
12−14
+20%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
−16.7%
14−16
+16.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
−8.6%
35−40
+8.6%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−75%
7−8
+75%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Hitman 3 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Watch Dogs: Legion 10−12
−45.5%
16−18
+45.5%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%

4K
Ultra Preset

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

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%

Full HD
Medium Preset

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

Full HD
High Preset

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

Full HD
Ultra Preset

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

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Forza Horizon 4 0−1 0−1

This is how R7 (Carrizo) and Qualcomm Adreno 680 compete in popular games:

  • A tie in 1080p

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

  • in Battlefield 5, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Qualcomm Adreno 680 is 300% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Qualcomm Adreno 680 is ahead in 47 tests (80%)
  • there's a draw in 12 tests (20%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.00 2.11
Recency 4 June 2015 6 December 2018
Chip lithography 28 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 12 Watt 7 Watt

Qualcomm Adreno 680 has a 5.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 300% more advanced lithography process, and 71.4% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Radeon R7 (Carrizo) and Qualcomm Adreno 680.


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 R7 (Carrizo)
Radeon R7 (Carrizo)
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 7 votes

Rate Radeon R7 (Carrizo) 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.