GeForce MX110 vs Qualcomm Adreno 690

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Qualcomm Adreno 690 and GeForce MX110, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Qualcomm Adreno 690
2018
7 Watt
2.35

MX110 outperforms Qualcomm Adreno 690 by a substantial 35% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking814722
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency26.528.37
Architectureno dataMaxwell (2014−2017)
GPU code nameno dataGM108S
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date6 December 2018 (6 years ago)17 November 2017 (7 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 data256
Core clock speedno data978 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1006 MHz
Number of transistorsno data1,020 million
Manufacturing process technology5 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)7 Watt30 Watt
Texture fill rateno data16.10
Floating-point processing powerno data0.5151 TFLOPS
ROPsno data8
TMUsno data16

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).

Interfaceno dataPCIe 3.0 x4
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 dataGDDR5
Maximum RAM amountno data2 GB
Memory bus widthno data64 Bit
Memory clock speedno data1253 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data40.1 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 dataPortable Device Dependent

Supported technologies

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

Optimus-+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX1212 (11_0)
Shader Modelno data6.7 (5.1)
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data3.0
Vulkan-1.3
CUDA-+

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.

Qualcomm Adreno 690 2.35
GeForce MX110 3.18
+35.3%

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 690 1050
GeForce MX110 1421
+35.3%

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 690 2912
+37.3%
GeForce MX110 2121

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

Qualcomm Adreno 690 2933
+71.1%
GeForce MX110 1714

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

Qualcomm Adreno 690 16708
+48.3%
GeForce MX110 11266

3DMark Time Spy Graphics

Qualcomm Adreno 690 811
+80%
GeForce MX110 451

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 HD22
+22.2%
18
−22.2%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 7−8
−28.6%
9−10
+28.6%
Counter-Strike 2 6−7
−100%
12−14
+100%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 7−8
−28.6%
9−10
+28.6%
Battlefield 5 8−9
−75%
14
+75%
Counter-Strike 2 6−7
−100%
12−14
+100%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%
Far Cry 5 4−5
−150%
10
+150%
Fortnite 12−14
−131%
30
+131%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
−23.1%
16
+23.1%
Forza Horizon 5 4−5
−75%
7−8
+75%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
−38.5%
18
+38.5%
Valorant 40−45
−16.3%
50−55
+16.3%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 7−8
−28.6%
9−10
+28.6%
Battlefield 5 8−9
−50%
12
+50%
Counter-Strike 2 6−7
−100%
12−14
+100%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 45−50
+8.9%
45
−8.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%
Dota 2 43
+19.4%
36
−19.4%
Far Cry 5 4−5
−125%
9
+125%
Fortnite 12−14
−15.4%
15
+15.4%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+8.3%
12
−8.3%
Forza Horizon 5 4−5
−75%
7−8
+75%
Grand Theft Auto V 7−8
−85.7%
13
+85.7%
Metro Exodus 4−5
+100%
2
−100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
−30.8%
17
+30.8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 19
+111%
9
−111%
Valorant 40−45
−16.3%
50−55
+16.3%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 8−9
−62.5%
12−14
+62.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%
Dota 2 35
+6.1%
33
−6.1%
Far Cry 5 4−5
−100%
8
+100%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
−23.1%
16−18
+23.1%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+8.3%
12
−8.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9
+80%
5
−80%
Valorant 40−45
−16.3%
50−55
+16.3%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 12−14
+8.3%
12
−8.3%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 18−20
−44.4%
24−27
+44.4%
Grand Theft Auto V 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%
Metro Exodus 0−1 1−2
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
−27.3%
27−30
+27.3%
Valorant 21−24
−52.2%
35−40
+52.2%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Far Cry 5 4−5
−50%
6−7
+50%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
−33.3%
8−9
+33.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−6.7%
16−18
+6.7%
Valorant 12−14
−30.8%
16−18
+30.8%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 7−8
−57.1%
10−12
+57.1%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%

This is how Qualcomm Adreno 690 and GeForce MX110 compete in popular games:

  • Qualcomm Adreno 690 is 22% faster in 1080p

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

  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the Qualcomm Adreno 690 is 111% faster.
  • in Grand Theft Auto V, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the GeForce MX110 is 200% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Qualcomm Adreno 690 is ahead in 9 tests (16%)
  • GeForce MX110 is ahead in 46 tests (82%)
  • there's a draw in 1 test (2%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.35 3.18
Recency 6 December 2018 17 November 2017
Chip lithography 5 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 7 Watt 30 Watt

Qualcomm Adreno 690 has an age advantage of 1 year, a 460% more advanced lithography process, and 328.6% lower power consumption.

GeForce MX110, on the other hand, has a 35.3% higher aggregate performance score.

The GeForce MX110 is our recommended choice as it beats the Qualcomm Adreno 690 in performance tests.

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 690
Adreno 690
NVIDIA GeForce MX110
GeForce MX110

Other comparisons

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.


2.5 11 votes

Rate Qualcomm Adreno 690 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 2366 votes

Rate GeForce MX110 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Qualcomm Adreno 690 or GeForce MX110, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.