RTX A400 vs GeForce GTX 680MX

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 680MX with RTX A400, including specs and performance data.

GTX 680MX
2012
2 GB GDDR5, 122 Watt
10.73
+32.6%

GTX 680MX outperforms RTX A400 by a substantial 33% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking424509
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code nameno dataGA107
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date23 October 2012 (11 years ago)16 April 2024 (less than a year ago)

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores1536768
CUDA cores1536no data
Core clock speed720 MHzno data
Boost clock speedno data1762 MHz
Number of transistors3540 Million8,700 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)122 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate92.2 billion/sec42.29

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 sizelargeno data
Bus supportPCI Express 3.0no data
Interfaceno dataPCIe 4.0 x8
Lengthno data163 mm
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone
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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount2 GB4 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed2500 MHz12 GB/s
Memory bandwidth160 GB/s96 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 Connectorsno data4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a

Supported technologies

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

3D Vision+-
Optimus+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 API12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Modelno data6.7
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.13.0
Vulkan-1.3
CUDA+8.6

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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 680MX 10.73
+32.6%
RTX A400 8.09

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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 680MX 4142
+32.6%
RTX A400 3123

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 HD58
+45%
40−45
−45%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+41.7%
12−14
−41.7%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 24−27
+38.9%
18−20
−38.9%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18
+33.3%
12−14
−33.3%
Battlefield 5 30−35
+41.7%
24−27
−41.7%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
+37.5%
16−18
−37.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+41.7%
12−14
−41.7%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+38.9%
18−20
−38.9%
Far Cry New Dawn 30−33
+42.9%
21−24
−42.9%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+42%
50−55
−42%
Hitman 3 20−22
+42.9%
14−16
−42.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn 55−60
+45%
40−45
−45%
Metro Exodus 35−40
+45.8%
24−27
−45.8%
Red Dead Redemption 2 30−33
+42.9%
21−24
−42.9%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 35−40
+45.8%
24−27
−45.8%
Watch Dogs: Legion 65−70
+44.4%
45−50
−44.4%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 24−27
+38.9%
18−20
−38.9%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18
+33.3%
12−14
−33.3%
Battlefield 5 30−35
+41.7%
24−27
−41.7%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
+37.5%
16−18
−37.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+41.7%
12−14
−41.7%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+38.9%
18−20
−38.9%
Far Cry New Dawn 30−33
+42.9%
21−24
−42.9%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+42%
50−55
−42%
Hitman 3 20−22
+42.9%
14−16
−42.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn 55−60
+45%
40−45
−45%
Metro Exodus 35−40
+45.8%
24−27
−45.8%
Red Dead Redemption 2 30−33
+42.9%
21−24
−42.9%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 35−40
+45.8%
24−27
−45.8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
+33.3%
21−24
−33.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 65−70
+44.4%
45−50
−44.4%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 24−27
+38.9%
18−20
−38.9%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18
+33.3%
12−14
−33.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
+37.5%
16−18
−37.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+41.7%
12−14
−41.7%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+38.9%
18−20
−38.9%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+42%
50−55
−42%
Hitman 3 20−22
+42.9%
14−16
−42.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn 55−60
+45%
40−45
−45%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 35−40
+45.8%
24−27
−45.8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14
+40%
10−11
−40%
Watch Dogs: Legion 65−70
+44.4%
45−50
−44.4%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 30−33
+42.9%
21−24
−42.9%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
+50%
14−16
−50%
Far Cry New Dawn 16−18
+33.3%
12−14
−33.3%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−11
+42.9%
7−8
−42.9%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−12
+37.5%
8−9
−37.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+33.3%
9−10
−33.3%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+40%
35−40
−40%
Hitman 3 14−16
+40%
10−11
−40%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+37.5%
16−18
−37.5%
Metro Exodus 16−18
+33.3%
12−14
−33.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 14−16
+50%
10−11
−50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
+42.9%
7−8
−42.9%
Watch Dogs: Legion 65−70
+36%
50−55
−36%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 18−20
+50%
12−14
−50%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 10−11
+42.9%
7−8
−42.9%
Far Cry New Dawn 8−9
+33.3%
6−7
−33.3%
Hitman 3 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50
+37.1%
35−40
−37.1%
Metro Exodus 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
+33.3%
6−7
−33.3%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+40%
10−11
−40%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
+33.3%
6−7
−33.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 10−11
+42.9%
7−8
−42.9%

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

  • GTX 680MX is 45% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 10.73 8.09
Recency 23 October 2012 16 April 2024
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 8 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 122 Watt 50 Watt

GTX 680MX has a 32.6% higher aggregate performance score.

RTX A400, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 11 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 250% more advanced lithography process, and 144% lower power consumption.

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

Be aware that GeForce GTX 680MX is a notebook card while RTX A400 is a desktop one.


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 680MX
GeForce GTX 680MX
NVIDIA RTX A400
RTX A400

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.


3.6 24 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 680MX on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 8 votes

Rate RTX A400 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.