Radeon HD 6680G2 vs GeForce GTX 260M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 260M and Radeon HD 6680G2, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTX 260M
2009
1 GB GDDR3, 65 Watt
0.98

HD 6680G2 outperforms GTX 260M by a considerable 44% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking11101004
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency1.04no data
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)Terascale 2 (2009−2015)
GPU code nameG92no data
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date3 March 2009 (15 years ago)14 June 2011 (13 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 cores112800
Core clock speed550 MHzno data
Number of transistors754 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology65 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)65 Wattno data
Texture fill rate30.80no data
Floating-point processing power0.308 TFLOPSno data
Gigaflops462no data
ROPs16no data
TMUs56no 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).

Laptop sizelargemedium sized
Bus supportPCI-E 2.0no data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16no data
SLI options2-way-
MXM TypeMXM 3.0 Type-Bno 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 typeGDDR3no data
Maximum RAM amount1 GBno data
Memory bus width256 Bitno data
Memory clock speedUp to 950 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth61 GB/sno 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 ConnectorsDisplayPortSingle Link DVIDual Link DVIVGALVDSHDMIno data
HDMI+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIS/PDIFno data

Supported technologies

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

Power management8.0no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)11
Shader Model4.0no data
OpenGL2.1no data
OpenCL1.1no data
VulkanN/A-
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.

GTX 260M 0.98
HD 6680G2 1.41
+43.9%

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

GTX 260M 4901
+52%
HD 6680G2 3224

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 HD29
−37.9%
40−45
+37.9%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Hitman 3 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
−15.4%
14−16
+15.4%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−3.1%
30−35
+3.1%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Hitman 3 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
−15.4%
14−16
+15.4%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−10%
10−12
+10%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−3.1%
30−35
+3.1%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Hitman 3 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
−15.4%
14−16
+15.4%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−10%
10−12
+10%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−3.1%
30−35
+3.1%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Hitman 3 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 0−1 1−2
Watch Dogs: Legion 4−5
−75%
7−8
+75%

1440p
Epic Preset

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

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 0−1 1−2

4K
Ultra Preset

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

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 0−1

This is how GTX 260M and HD 6680G2 compete in popular games:

  • HD 6680G2 is 38% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Far Cry 5, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the HD 6680G2 is 100% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • HD 6680G2 is ahead in 34 tests (74%)
  • there's a draw in 12 tests (26%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.98 1.41
Recency 3 March 2009 14 June 2011
Chip lithography 65 nm 40 nm

HD 6680G2 has a 43.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, and a 62.5% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon HD 6680G2 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 260M 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.


NVIDIA GeForce GTX 260M
GeForce GTX 260M
AMD Radeon HD 6680G2
Radeon HD 6680G2

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.


3.2 15 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 260M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
1.8 4 votes

Rate Radeon HD 6680G2 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.