RTX A400 vs GeForce GTX 680M

Place in the ranking	498	469
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	3.46	no data
Power efficiency	5.98	13.20
Architecture	Kepler (2012−2018)	Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code name	GK104	GA107
Market segment	Laptop	Workstation
Release date	4 June 2012 (12 years ago)	16 April 2024 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$310.50	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	1344	768
Core clock speed	719 MHz	727 MHz
Boost clock speed	758 MHz	1762 MHz
Number of transistors	3,540 million	8,700 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	50 Watt
Texture fill rate	84.90	42.29
Floating-point processing power	2.038 TFLOPS	2.706 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	16
TMUs	112	24
Tensor Cores	no data	24
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	6

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 size	large	no data
Bus support	PCI Express 3.0	no data
Interface	MXM-B (3.0)	PCIe 4.0 x8
Length	no data	163 mm
Width	no data	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	None
SLI options	+	-

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	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	4 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	1800 MHz	1500 MHz
Memory bandwidth	115.2 GB/s	96 GB/s
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

4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a

Supported technologies

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

Optimus

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 API	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	5.1	6.7
OpenGL	4.5	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	3.0
Vulkan	1.1.126	1.3
CUDA	+	8.6

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 680M 8.37

RTX A400 9.24
+10.4%

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.

GTX 680M 3228

RTX A400 3564
+10.4%

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:

900p	67 −4.5%	70−75 +4.5%
Full HD	61 −6.6%	65−70 +6.6%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

12−14

−7.7%

14−16
+7.7%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	20−22 −5%	21−24 +5%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Battlefield 5	24−27 −8%	27−30 +8%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	16−18 −5.9%	18−20 +5.9%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 −7.7%	14−16 +7.7%
Far Cry 5	18−20 +5.6%	18−20 −5.6%
Far Cry New Dawn	21−24 −4.3%	24−27 +4.3%
Forza Horizon 4	55−60 −9.1%	60−65 +9.1%
Hitman 3	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	45−50 −6.4%	50−55 +6.4%
Metro Exodus	24−27 −8%	27−30 +8%
Red Dead Redemption 2	21−24 −4.3%	24−27 +4.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	27−30 −7.1%	30−33 +7.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion	55−60 −3.4%	60−65 +3.4%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	20−22 −5%	21−24 +5%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Battlefield 5	24−27 −8%	27−30 +8%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	16−18 −5.9%	18−20 +5.9%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 −7.7%	14−16 +7.7%
Far Cry 5	18−20 +5.6%	18−20 −5.6%
Far Cry New Dawn	21−24 −4.3%	24−27 +4.3%
Forza Horizon 4	55−60 −9.1%	60−65 +9.1%
Hitman 3	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	45−50 −6.4%	50−55 +6.4%
Metro Exodus	24−27 −8%	27−30 +8%
Red Dead Redemption 2	21−24 −4.3%	24−27 +4.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	27−30 −7.1%	30−33 +7.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	55−60 −3.4%	60−65 +3.4%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	20−22 −5%	21−24 +5%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	16−18 −5.9%	18−20 +5.9%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 −7.7%	14−16 +7.7%
Far Cry 5	18−20 +5.6%	18−20 −5.6%
Forza Horizon 4	55−60 −9.1%	60−65 +9.1%
Hitman 3	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	45−50 −6.4%	50−55 +6.4%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	27−30 −7.1%	30−33 +7.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	55−60 −3.4%	60−65 +3.4%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

21−24

−4.3%

24−27
+4.3%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	12−14 −7.7%	14−16 +7.7%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Far Cry 5	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	30−35 −6.1%	35−40 +6.1%
Hitman 3	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	16−18 −5.9%	18−20 +5.9%
Metro Exodus	10−12 −9.1%	12−14 +9.1%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	50−55 −3.8%	55−60 +3.8%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

14−16

+0%

14−16
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Hitman 3	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	30−35 +3.3%	30−33 −3.3%
Metro Exodus	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Far Cry 5	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

8−9

+0%

8−9
+0%

This is how GTX 680M and RTX A400 compete in popular games:

RTX A400 is 4% faster in 900p
RTX A400 is 7% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	8.37	9.24
Recency	4 June 2012	16 April 2024
Chip lithography	28 nm	8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	50 Watt

RTX A400 has a 10.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, a 250% more advanced lithography process, and 100% lower power consumption.

The RTX A400 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 680M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 680M is a notebook card while RTX A400 is a workstation one.

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