Qualcomm Adreno 685 vs Radeon RX 480

Place in the ranking	248	826
Place by popularity	97	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	15.79	no data
Power efficiency	10.28	25.04
Architecture	GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)	no data
GPU code name	Ellesmere	no data
GCN generation	4th Gen	no data
Market segment	Desktop	Laptop
Design	reference	no data
Release date	29 June 2016 (8 years ago)	6 December 2018 (6 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$229	no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores	2304	no data
Compute units	36	no data
Core clock speed	1120 MHz	no data
Boost clock speed	1266 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	5,700 million	no data
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	150 Watt	7 Watt
Texture fill rate	182.3	no data
Floating-point processing power	5.834 TFLOPS	no data
ROPs	32	no data
TMUs	144	no 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 support	n/a	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	no data
Length	241 mm	no data
Width	2-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	1x 6-pin	no data
Bridgeless CrossFire	+	-

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	GDDR5	no data
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	no data
Memory bus width	256 Bit	no data
Memory clock speed	8000 MHz	no data
Memory bandwidth	224 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	1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort	no data
Eyefinity	+	-
HDMI	2.0	-
DisplayPort support	1.4HDR	-

Supported technologies

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

AppAcceleration	n/a	-
CrossFire	+	-
Enduro	n/a	-
FRTC	+	-
FreeSync	+	-
HD3D	n/a	-
LiquidVR	+	-
PowerTune	+	-
TressFX	+	-
TrueAudio	n/a	-
ZeroCore	+	-
UVD	+	-
VCE	+	-

API compatibility

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

DirectX	DirectX® 12	12
Shader Model	6.4	no data
OpenGL	4.5	no data
OpenCL	2.0	no data
Vulkan	+	-
Mantle	n/a	-

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.

RX 480 22.34
+780%

Qualcomm Adreno 685 2.54

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.

RX 480 8611
+780%

Qualcomm Adreno 685 979

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.

RX 480 17919
+830%

Qualcomm Adreno 685 1927

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	78 +875%	8−9 −875%
1440p	52 +940%	5−6 −940%
4K	35 +1067%	3−4 −1067%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	2.94	no data
1440p	4.40	no data
4K	6.54	no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

35−40
+620%

5−6

−620%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	58 +544%	9−10 −544%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	35−40	0−1
Battlefield 5	70−75 +1725%	4−5 −1725%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	45−50 +543%	7−8 −543%
Cyberpunk 2077	35−40 +620%	5−6 −620%
Far Cry 5	50−55 +940%	5−6 −940%
Far Cry New Dawn	55−60 +743%	7−8 −743%
Forza Horizon 4	130−140 +931%	12−14 −931%
Hitman 3	40−45 +529%	7−8 −529%
Horizon Zero Dawn	100−110 +400%	21−24 −400%
Metro Exodus	93 +4550%	2−3 −4550%
Red Dead Redemption 2	55−60 +883%	6−7 −883%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	110 +817%	12−14 −817%
Watch Dogs: Legion	95−100 +155%	35−40 −155%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	93 +933%	9−10 −933%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	35−40	0−1
Battlefield 5	48 +1100%	4−5 −1100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	45−50 +543%	7−8 −543%
Cyberpunk 2077	35−40 +620%	5−6 −620%
Far Cry 5	50−55 +940%	5−6 −940%
Far Cry New Dawn	31 +343%	7−8 −343%
Forza Horizon 4	130−140 +931%	12−14 −931%
Hitman 3	40−45 +529%	7−8 −529%
Horizon Zero Dawn	100−110 +400%	21−24 −400%
Metro Exodus	78 +3800%	2−3 −3800%
Red Dead Redemption 2	55−60 +883%	6−7 −883%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	75−80 +525%	12−14 −525%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	45−50 +250%	14−16 −250%
Watch Dogs: Legion	95−100 +155%	35−40 −155%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	35 +289%	9−10 −289%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	35−40	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	45−50 +543%	7−8 −543%
Cyberpunk 2077	35−40 +620%	5−6 −620%
Far Cry 5	45 +800%	5−6 −800%
Forza Horizon 4	77 +492%	12−14 −492%
Hitman 3	40−45 +529%	7−8 −529%
Horizon Zero Dawn	100−110 +400%	21−24 −400%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	75−80 +525%	12−14 −525%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	44 +214%	14−16 −214%
Watch Dogs: Legion	95−100 +155%	35−40 −155%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

55−60
+883%

6−7

−883%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	65 +1525%	4−5 −1525%
Far Cry New Dawn	42 +950%	4−5 −950%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	21−24 +1050%	2−3 −1050%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	21−24 +950%	2−3 −950%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	24−27 +1150%	2−3 −1150%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 +1300%	1−2 −1300%
Far Cry 5	30 +900%	3−4 −900%
Forza Horizon 4	120−130 +800%	14−16 −800%
Hitman 3	24−27 +225%	8−9 −225%
Horizon Zero Dawn	45−50 +557%	7−8 −557%
Metro Exodus	50 +900%	5−6 −900%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	45−50 +840%	5−6 −840%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	27−30 +1250%	2−3 −1250%
Watch Dogs: Legion	120−130 +706%	16−18 −706%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

35−40
+517%

6−7

−517%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	31 +3000%	1−2 −3000%
Far Cry New Dawn	21 +950%	2−3 −950%
Hitman 3	16−18 +1600%	1−2 −1600%
Horizon Zero Dawn	60 +900%	6−7 −900%
Metro Exodus	25 +1150%	2−3 −1150%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	27 +800%	3−4 −800%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	17 +750%	2−3 −750%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	12−14 +1100%	1−2 −1100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	12−14 +1100%	1−2 −1100%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6	0−1
Far Cry 5	15 +1400%	1−2 −1400%
Forza Horizon 4	30−35 +933%	3−4 −933%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	24−27 +1200%	2−3 −1200%
Watch Dogs: Legion	10−11	0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

18−20
+375%

4−5

−375%

This is how RX 480 and Qualcomm Adreno 685 compete in popular games:

RX 480 is 875% faster in 1080p
RX 480 is 940% faster in 1440p
RX 480 is 1067% faster in 4K

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

in Metro Exodus, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the RX 480 is 4550% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Without exception, RX 480 surpassed Qualcomm Adreno 685 in all 57 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	22.34	2.54
Recency	29 June 2016	6 December 2018
Chip lithography	14 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	150 Watt	7 Watt

RX 480 has a 779.5% higher aggregate performance score.

Qualcomm Adreno 685, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 2042.9% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX 480 is our recommended choice as it beats the Qualcomm Adreno 685 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon RX 480 is a desktop card while Qualcomm Adreno 685 is a notebook one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.