Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-45 2.1 TFLOPS vs Qualcomm Adreno 680
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 861 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 21.24 | no data |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 6 December 2018 (6 years ago) | 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 | no data | 768 |
| Manufacturing process technology | 7 nm | 4 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 7 Watt | 20 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 type | no data | LPDDR5x |
| Memory bus width | no data | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | no data | 8448 MHz |
| Shared memory | + | + |
API compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 | 12_1 |
Pros & cons summary
| Chip lithography | 7 nm | 4 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 7 Watt | 20 Watt |
Qualcomm Adreno 680 has 185.7% lower power consumption.
Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-45 2.1 TFLOPS, on the other hand, has a 75% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between Qualcomm Adreno 680 and Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-45 2.1 TFLOPS. We've got no test results to judge.
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.
