GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile vs Qualcomm Adreno 680

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Qualcomm Adreno 680 and GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Qualcomm Adreno 680
2018
7 Watt
2.18

RTX 3050 Ti Mobile outperforms Qualcomm Adreno 680 by a whopping 1107% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking860209
Place by popularitynot in top-10054
Power efficiency21.3424.05
Architectureno dataAmpere (2020−2024)
GPU code nameno dataGA106
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date6 December 2018 (6 years ago)11 May 2021 (3 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 coresno data2560
Core clock speedno data735 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1035 MHz
Number of transistorsno data13,250 million
Manufacturing process technology7 nm8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)7 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rateno data82.80
Floating-point processing powerno data5.299 TFLOPS
ROPsno data48
TMUsno data80
Tensor Coresno data80
Ray Tracing Coresno data20

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 sizeno datalarge
Interfaceno dataPCIe 4.0 x16

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 typeno dataGDDR6
Maximum RAM amountno data4 GB
Memory bus widthno data128 Bit
Memory clock speedno data1500 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data192.0 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 dataNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX1212 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Modelno data6.6
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data3.0
Vulkan-1.2
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.

Qualcomm Adreno 680 2.18
RTX 3050 Ti Mobile 26.32
+1107%

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.

Qualcomm Adreno 680 839
RTX 3050 Ti Mobile 10140
+1109%

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.

Qualcomm Adreno 680 1936
RTX 3050 Ti Mobile 18057
+833%

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 HD6−7
−1150%
75
+1150%
1440p3−4
−1300%
42
+1300%
4K2−3
−1150%
25
+1150%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−1140%
62
+1140%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
−511%
55−60
+511%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
−5900%
60
+5900%
Battlefield 5 4−5
−1950%
80−85
+1950%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
−629%
50−55
+629%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−1080%
59
+1080%
Far Cry 5 5−6
−1060%
55−60
+1060%
Far Cry New Dawn 7−8
−829%
65−70
+829%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
−943%
140−150
+943%
Hitman 3 8−9
−900%
80
+900%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
−448%
110−120
+448%
Metro Exodus 3−4
−4667%
143
+4667%
Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
−1300%
98
+1300%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
−608%
85−90
+608%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
−508%
231
+508%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
−511%
55−60
+511%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
−3400%
35
+3400%
Battlefield 5 4−5
−1950%
80−85
+1950%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
−629%
50−55
+629%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−800%
45
+800%
Far Cry 5 5−6
−1060%
55−60
+1060%
Far Cry New Dawn 7−8
−829%
65−70
+829%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
−943%
140−150
+943%
Hitman 3 8−9
−863%
77
+863%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
−448%
110−120
+448%
Metro Exodus 3−4
−3700%
114
+3700%
Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
−1014%
78
+1014%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
−775%
105
+775%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
−286%
50−55
+286%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
−434%
203
+434%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
−511%
55−60
+511%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
−2500%
26
+2500%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
−629%
50−55
+629%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−700%
40
+700%
Far Cry 5 5−6
−1060%
55−60
+1060%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
−943%
140−150
+943%
Hitman 3 8−9
−738%
67
+738%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
−338%
92
+338%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
−650%
90
+650%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
−257%
50
+257%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+35.7%
28
−35.7%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
−1057%
81
+1057%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5
−1075%
45−50
+1075%
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5
−850%
35−40
+850%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
−1200%
24−27
+1200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−1300%
27−30
+1300%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−2100%
22
+2100%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−867%
27−30
+867%
Hitman 3 8−9
−475%
46
+475%
Horizon Zero Dawn 7−8
−886%
69
+886%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
−1450%
30−35
+1450%
Watch Dogs: Legion 16−18
−769%
139
+769%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
−833%
56
+833%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
−2400%
24−27
+2400%
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
−850%
18−20
+850%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
−650%
14−16
+650%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
−1200%
12−14
+1200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2
−1300%
14−16
+1300%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−1300%
14−16
+1300%
Forza Horizon 4 0−1 30−35
Watch Dogs: Legion 0−1 10

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−625%
29
+625%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 26
+0%
26
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Metro Exodus 60
+0%
60
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 61
+0%
61
+0%

4K
High Preset

Hitman 3 20
+0%
20
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Metro Exodus 47
+0%
47
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 29
+0%
29
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 10
+0%
10
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 34
+0%
34
+0%

This is how Qualcomm Adreno 680 and RTX 3050 Ti Mobile compete in popular games:

  • RTX 3050 Ti Mobile is 1150% faster in 1080p
  • RTX 3050 Ti Mobile is 1300% faster in 1440p
  • RTX 3050 Ti Mobile is 1150% faster in 4K

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

  • in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Qualcomm Adreno 680 is 36% faster.
  • in Assassin's Creed Valhalla, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile is 5900% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Qualcomm Adreno 680 is ahead in 1 test (1%)
  • RTX 3050 Ti Mobile is ahead in 59 tests (84%)
  • there's a draw in 10 tests (14%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.18 26.32
Recency 6 December 2018 11 May 2021
Chip lithography 7 nm 8 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 7 Watt 75 Watt

Qualcomm Adreno 680 has a 14.3% more advanced lithography process, and 971.4% lower power consumption.

RTX 3050 Ti Mobile, on the other hand, has a 1107.3% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 2 years.

The GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Qualcomm Adreno 680 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.


Qualcomm Adreno 680
Adreno 680
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile
GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile

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.


3.4 38 votes

Rate Qualcomm Adreno 680 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 4226 votes

Rate GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile 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.