Qualcomm Adreno 680 vs Tesla P4

Place in the ranking	245	863
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	21.47	21.92
Architecture	Pascal (2016−2021)	no data
GPU code name	GP104	no data
Market segment	Workstation	Laptop
Release date	13 September 2016 (8 years ago)	6 December 2018 (6 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 cores	2560	no data
Core clock speed	886 MHz	no data
Boost clock speed	1114 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	7,200 million	no data
Manufacturing process technology	16 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	7 Watt
Texture fill rate	178.2	no data
Floating-point processing power	5.704 TFLOPS	no data
ROPs	64	no data
TMUs	160	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).

Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	no data
Length	168 mm	no data
Width	1-slot	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	GDDR5	no data
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	no data
Memory bus width	256 Bit	no data
Memory clock speed	1502 MHz	no data
Memory bandwidth	192.3 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

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12
Shader Model	6.4	no data
OpenGL	4.6	no data
OpenCL	1.2	no data
Vulkan	1.2.131	-
CUDA	6.1	-

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.

Tesla P4 23.09
+950%

Qualcomm Adreno 680 2.20

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.

Tesla P4 8987
+949%

Qualcomm Adreno 680 857

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	0−1	0−1
Metro Exodus	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Dota 2	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Far Cry 5	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Fortnite	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	0−1	0−1
Grand Theft Auto V	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Metro Exodus	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
World of Tanks	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Dota 2	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Far Cry 5	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	0−1	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	0−1	0−1
Grand Theft Auto V	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
World of Tanks	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Far Cry 5	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Valorant	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Dota 2	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Dota 2	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Far Cry 5	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Fortnite	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	0−1	0−1
Valorant	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 51 test (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	23.09	2.20
Recency	13 September 2016	6 December 2018
Chip lithography	16 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	7 Watt

Tesla P4 has a 949.5% higher aggregate performance score.

Qualcomm Adreno 680, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, a 128.6% more advanced lithography process, and 971.4% lower power consumption.

The Tesla P4 is our recommended choice as it beats the Qualcomm Adreno 680 in performance tests.

Be aware that Tesla P4 is a workstation card while Qualcomm Adreno 680 is a notebook one.

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