Qualcomm Adreno 690 vs Titan X Pascal

Place in the ranking	156	809
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	6.90	no data
Power efficiency	9.40	26.45
Architecture	Pascal (2016−2021)	no data
GPU code name	GP102	no data
Market segment	Desktop	Laptop
Release date	2 August 2016 (8 years ago)	6 December 2018 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$1,199	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	3584	no data
Core clock speed	1417 MHz	no data
Boost clock speed	1531 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	11,800 million	no data
Manufacturing process technology	16 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	250 Watt	7 Watt
Texture fill rate	342.9	no data
Floating-point processing power	10.97 TFLOPS	no data
ROPs	96	no data
TMUs	224	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	267 mm	no data
Width	2-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin	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	GDDR5X	no data
Maximum RAM amount	12 GB	no data
Memory bus width	384 Bit	no data
Memory clock speed	1251 MHz	no data
Memory bandwidth	480.4 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	1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort	no data
HDMI	+	-
G-SYNC support	+	-

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	+	-
CUDA	+	-

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.

Titan X Pascal 33.77
+1170%

Qualcomm Adreno 690 2.66

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.

Titan X Pascal 13026
+1168%

Qualcomm Adreno 690 1027

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.

Titan X Pascal 35981
+1136%

Qualcomm Adreno 690 2912

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.

Titan X Pascal 27349
+833%

Qualcomm Adreno 690 2933

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

Titan X Pascal 136891
+719%

Qualcomm Adreno 690 16708

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	126 +404%	25 −404%
1440p	72 +1340%	5−6 −1340%
4K	56 +1300%	4−5 −1300%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	9.52	no data
1440p	16.65	no data
4K	21.41	no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

79
+888%

8−9

−888%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	104 +700%	12−14 −700%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	95 +1800%	5−6 −1800%
Battlefield 5	174 +1350%	12−14 −1350%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	108 +980%	10−11 −980%
Cyberpunk 2077	78 +875%	8−9 −875%
Far Cry 5	121 +1110%	10−11 −1110%
Far Cry New Dawn	138 +886%	14−16 −886%
Forza Horizon 4	240 +700%	30−33 −700%
Hitman 3	104 +845%	10−12 −845%
Horizon Zero Dawn	296 +855%	30−35 −855%
Metro Exodus	143 +1200%	10−12 −1200%
Red Dead Redemption 2	125 +862%	12−14 −862%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	161 +794%	18−20 −794%
Watch Dogs: Legion	226 +391%	45−50 −391%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	121 +831%	12−14 −831%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	85 +1600%	5−6 −1600%
Battlefield 5	165 +1275%	12−14 −1275%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	98 +880%	10−11 −880%
Cyberpunk 2077	69 +763%	8−9 −763%
Far Cry 5	92 +820%	10−11 −820%
Far Cry New Dawn	108 +671%	14−16 −671%
Forza Horizon 4	225 +650%	30−33 −650%
Hitman 3	104 +845%	10−12 −845%
Horizon Zero Dawn	275 +787%	30−35 −787%
Metro Exodus	143 +1200%	10−12 −1200%
Red Dead Redemption 2	102 +685%	12−14 −685%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	194 +978%	18−20 −978%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	96 +465%	16−18 −465%
Watch Dogs: Legion	216 +370%	45−50 −370%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	67 +415%	12−14 −415%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	63 +1160%	5−6 −1160%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	75 +650%	10−11 −650%
Cyberpunk 2077	59 +638%	8−9 −638%
Far Cry 5	67 +570%	10−11 −570%
Forza Horizon 4	112 +273%	30−33 −273%
Hitman 3	93 +745%	10−12 −745%
Horizon Zero Dawn	150 +384%	30−35 −384%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	167 +828%	18−20 −828%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	95 +956%	9 −956%
Watch Dogs: Legion	64 +39.1%	45−50 −39.1%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

118
+808%

12−14

−808%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	60−65 +611%	9−10 −611%
Far Cry New Dawn	50−55 +629%	7−8 −629%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	35−40 +800%	4−5 −800%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	51 +1175%	4−5 −1175%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	58 +1350%	4−5 −1350%
Cyberpunk 2077	38 +1800%	2−3 −1800%
Far Cry 5	35−40 +550%	6−7 −550%
Forza Horizon 4	190−200 +1830%	10−11 −1830%
Hitman 3	66 +633%	9−10 −633%
Horizon Zero Dawn	118 +973%	10−12 −973%
Metro Exodus	101 +4950%	2−3 −4950%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	122 +1256%	9−10 −1256%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	45−50 +1050%	4−5 −1050%
Watch Dogs: Legion	212 +584%	30−35 −584%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

92
+922%

9−10

−922%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	63 +2000%	3−4 −2000%
Far Cry New Dawn	48 +1500%	3−4 −1500%
Hitman 3	39 +3800%	1−2 −3800%
Horizon Zero Dawn	129 +2050%	6−7 −2050%
Metro Exodus	67 +6600%	1−2 −6600%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	68 +6700%	1−2 −6700%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	38 +1167%	3−4 −1167%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	32 +1500%	2−3 −1500%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	34 +1600%	2−3 −1600%
Cyberpunk 2077	18	0−1
Far Cry 5	33 +1550%	2−3 −1550%
Forza Horizon 4	73 +1725%	4−5 −1725%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	70 +1300%	5−6 −1300%
Watch Dogs: Legion	26 +2500%	1−2 −2500%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

47
+840%

5−6

−840%

This is how Titan X Pascal and Qualcomm Adreno 690 compete in popular games:

Titan X Pascal is 404% faster in 1080p
Titan X Pascal is 1340% faster in 1440p
Titan X Pascal is 1300% faster in 4K

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

in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the Titan X Pascal is 6700% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Without exception, Titan X Pascal surpassed Qualcomm Adreno 690 in all 68 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	33.77	2.66
Recency	2 August 2016	6 December 2018
Chip lithography	16 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	250 Watt	7 Watt

Titan X Pascal has a 1169.5% higher aggregate performance score.

Qualcomm Adreno 690, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, a 220% more advanced lithography process, and 3471.4% lower power consumption.

The Titan X Pascal is our recommended choice as it beats the Qualcomm Adreno 690 in performance tests.

Be aware that Titan X Pascal is a desktop card while Qualcomm Adreno 690 is a notebook one.

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