Qualcomm Adreno 680 vs HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge)
Aggregate performance score
We've compared HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge) and Qualcomm Adreno 680, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
Qualcomm Adreno 680 outperforms HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge) by a whopping 235% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
Place in the ranking | 1192 | 868 |
Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
Power efficiency | no data | 20.84 |
Architecture | Gen. 7 Ivy Bridge (2012) | no data |
GPU code name | Ivy Bridge GT1 | no data |
Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
Release date | 1 October 2012 (12 years ago) | 6 December 2018 (5 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 cores | 6 | no data |
Core clock speed | 350 MHz | no data |
Boost clock speed | 1100 MHz | no data |
Manufacturing process technology | 22 nm | 7 nm |
Power consumption (TDP) | no data | 7 Watt |
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 bus width | 64/128 Bit | no data |
Shared memory | + | + |
API compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
DirectX | 11.0 | 12 |
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.
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 Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.
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 | 8
−200%
| 24−27
+200%
|
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 | 4−5
−125%
|
9−10
+125%
|
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 3−4
−133%
|
7−8
+133%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−66.7%
|
5−6
+66.7%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 1−2
−600%
|
7−8
+600%
|
Hitman 3 | 5−6
−60%
|
8−9
+60%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 10−12
−90.9%
|
21−24
+90.9%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 6−7
−100%
|
12−14
+100%
|
Watch Dogs: Legion | 30−33
−26.7%
|
35−40
+26.7%
|
Full HD
High Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 4−5
−125%
|
9−10
+125%
|
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 3−4
−133%
|
7−8
+133%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−66.7%
|
5−6
+66.7%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 1−2
−600%
|
7−8
+600%
|
Hitman 3 | 5−6
−60%
|
8−9
+60%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 10−12
−90.9%
|
21−24
+90.9%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 6−7
−100%
|
12−14
+100%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 10−11
−40%
|
14−16
+40%
|
Watch Dogs: Legion | 30−33
−26.7%
|
35−40
+26.7%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 4−5
−125%
|
9−10
+125%
|
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 3−4
−133%
|
7−8
+133%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−66.7%
|
5−6
+66.7%
|
Hitman 3 | 5−6
−60%
|
8−9
+60%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 10−12
−90.9%
|
21−24
+90.9%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 6−7
−100%
|
12−14
+100%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 10−11
−40%
|
14−16
+40%
|
Watch Dogs: Legion | 30−33
−26.7%
|
35−40
+26.7%
|
1440p
High Preset
Far Cry New Dawn | 1−2
−300%
|
4−5
+300%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 0−1 | 2−3 |
Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−200%
|
3−4
+200%
|
Hitman 3 | 6−7
−33.3%
|
8−9
+33.3%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 3−4
−133%
|
7−8
+133%
|
Watch Dogs: Legion | 1−2
−1500%
|
16−18
+1500%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 3−4
−100%
|
6−7
+100%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 1−2
−100%
|
2−3
+100%
|
Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 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 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Battlefield 5 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
Far Cry 5 | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
Metro Exodus | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
Full HD
High Preset
Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Battlefield 5 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
Far Cry 5 | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
Metro Exodus | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Far Cry 5 | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
1440p
High Preset
Battlefield 5 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
4K
High Preset
Battlefield 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Far Cry 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
Watch Dogs: Legion | 0−1 | 0−1 |
This is how HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge) and Qualcomm Adreno 680 compete in popular games:
- Qualcomm Adreno 680 is 200% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Qualcomm Adreno 680 is 1500% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Qualcomm Adreno 680 is ahead in 34 tests (59%)
- there's a draw in 24 tests (41%)
Pros & cons summary
Performance score | 0.63 | 2.11 |
Recency | 1 October 2012 | 6 December 2018 |
Chip lithography | 22 nm | 7 nm |
Qualcomm Adreno 680 has a 234.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, and a 214.3% more advanced lithography process.
The Qualcomm Adreno 680 is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge) in performance tests.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Comparisons with similar GPUs
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.