Qualcomm Adreno 685 vs UHD Graphics 605

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared UHD Graphics 605 and Qualcomm Adreno 685, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

UHD Graphics 605
2017
5 Watt
1.18

Qualcomm Adreno 685 outperforms UHD Graphics 605 by a whopping 115% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1069827
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency16.1724.86
ArchitectureGeneration 9.5 (2016−2020)no data
GPU code nameGemini Lake GT1.5no data
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date11 December 2017 (7 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 cores144no data
Core clock speed200 MHzno data
Boost clock speed750 MHzno data
Number of transistors189 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology14 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)5 Watt7 Watt
Texture fill rate13.50no data
Floating-point processing power0.216 TFLOPSno data
ROPs3no data
TMUs18no 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).

InterfaceRing Busno 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 typeSystem Sharedno data
Maximum RAM amountSystem Sharedno data
Memory bus widthSystem Sharedno data
Memory clock speedSystem Sharedno 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 ConnectorsPortable Device Dependentno data

Supported technologies

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

Quick Sync+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12
Shader Model6.4no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL3.0no data
Vulkan1.3-

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. 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.

UHD Graphics 605 1.18
Qualcomm Adreno 685 2.54
+115%

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.

UHD Graphics 605 453
Qualcomm Adreno 685 979
+116%

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.

UHD Graphics 605 648
Qualcomm Adreno 685 1927
+197%

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 HD12
−100%
24−27
+100%
1440p24
−108%
50−55
+108%
4K15
−100%
30−35
+100%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−66.7%
5−6
+66.7%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
−80%
9−10
+80%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−75%
7−8
+75%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−66.7%
5−6
+66.7%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−400%
5−6
+400%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
−133%
7−8
+133%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
−1200%
12−14
+1200%
Hitman 3 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
−50%
21−24
+50%
Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−200%
6−7
+200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
−50%
12−14
+50%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−18.8%
35−40
+18.8%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
−80%
9−10
+80%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−75%
7−8
+75%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−66.7%
5−6
+66.7%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−400%
5−6
+400%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
−133%
7−8
+133%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
−1200%
12−14
+1200%
Hitman 3 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
−50%
21−24
+50%
Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−200%
6−7
+200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
−50%
12−14
+50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
−27.3%
14−16
+27.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−18.8%
35−40
+18.8%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
−80%
9−10
+80%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−75%
7−8
+75%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−66.7%
5−6
+66.7%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−400%
5−6
+400%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
−1200%
12−14
+1200%
Hitman 3 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
−50%
21−24
+50%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
−50%
12−14
+50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1
−1300%
14−16
+1300%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−18.8%
35−40
+18.8%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−200%
6−7
+200%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
−300%
4−5
+300%
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%
Hitman 3 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 4−5
−75%
7−8
+75%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 0−1 2−3
Watch Dogs: Legion 5−6
−220%
16−18
+220%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−50%
6−7
+50%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 0−1 2−3

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 1−2
Far Cry 5 0−1 1−2

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1
Battlefield 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Metro Exodus 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1
Battlefield 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Metro Exodus 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Watch Dogs: Legion 0−1 0−1

This is how UHD Graphics 605 and Qualcomm Adreno 685 compete in popular games:

  • Qualcomm Adreno 685 is 100% faster in 1080p
  • Qualcomm Adreno 685 is 108% faster in 1440p
  • Qualcomm Adreno 685 is 100% faster in 4K

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

  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Qualcomm Adreno 685 is 1300% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Qualcomm Adreno 685 is ahead in 45 tests (85%)
  • there's a draw in 8 tests (15%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.18 2.54
Recency 11 December 2017 6 December 2018
Chip lithography 14 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 5 Watt 7 Watt

UHD Graphics 605 has 40% lower power consumption.

Qualcomm Adreno 685, on the other hand, has a 115.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 months, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

The Qualcomm Adreno 685 is our recommended choice as it beats the UHD Graphics 605 in performance tests.


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.


Intel UHD Graphics 605
UHD Graphics 605
Qualcomm Adreno 685
Adreno 685

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.


2.7 814 votes

Rate UHD Graphics 605 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 15 votes

Rate Qualcomm Adreno 685 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.