Qualcomm Adreno 680 vs Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS and Qualcomm Adreno 680, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS
40 Watt
11.02
+396%

Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS outperforms Qualcomm Adreno 680 by a whopping 396% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking426860
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency18.9721.83
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release dateno data6 December 2018 (6 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 cores1536no data
Boost clock speed1500 MHzno data
Manufacturing process technology4 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)40 Watt7 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 typeLPDDR5xno data
Memory clock speed8448 MHzno data
Shared memory++

API compatibility

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

DirectX12_112

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 SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS 11.02
+396%
Qualcomm Adreno 680 2.22

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 Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.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 SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS 7061
+265%
Qualcomm Adreno 680 1936

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 HD39
+457%
7−8
−457%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 23
+130%
10−11
−130%
Elden Ring 30−35
+967%
3−4
−967%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+620%
5−6
−620%
Counter-Strike 2 22
+120%
10−11
−120%
Forza Horizon 4 56
+409%
10−12
−409%
Metro Exodus 30−33
+900%
3−4
−900%
Red Dead Redemption 2 27−30
+222%
9−10
−222%
Valorant 40−45
+425%
8−9
−425%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+620%
5−6
−620%
Counter-Strike 2 19
+90%
10−11
−90%
Dota 2 36
+620%
5−6
−620%
Elden Ring 30−35
+967%
3−4
−967%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+214%
14−16
−214%
Fortnite 60−65
+482%
10−12
−482%
Forza Horizon 4 48
+336%
10−12
−336%
Grand Theft Auto V 36
+620%
5−6
−620%
Metro Exodus 30−33
+900%
3−4
−900%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 80−85
+300%
21−24
−300%
Red Dead Redemption 2 27−30
+222%
9−10
−222%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+267%
9−10
−267%
Valorant 40−45
+425%
8−9
−425%
World of Tanks 150−160
+269%
40−45
−269%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+620%
5−6
−620%
Counter-Strike 2 17
+70%
10−11
−70%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+214%
14−16
−214%
Forza Horizon 4 41
+273%
10−12
−273%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 80−85
+300%
21−24
−300%
Valorant 40−45
+425%
8−9
−425%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 14−16
+600%
2−3
−600%
Elden Ring 16−18
+1500%
1−2
−1500%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+400%
3−4
−400%
Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
+800%
1−2
−800%
World of Tanks 75−80
+464%
14−16
−464%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
+2000%
1−2
−2000%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+22.2%
9−10
−22.2%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+300%
6−7
−300%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+400%
5−6
−400%
Metro Exodus 21−24
+450%
4−5
−450%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+333%
3−4
−333%
Valorant 27−30
+238%
8−9
−238%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Dota 2 21−24
+31.3%
16−18
−31.3%
Elden Ring 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Grand Theft Auto V 21−24
+40%
14−16
−40%
Metro Exodus 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+433%
6−7
−433%
Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+40%
14−16
−40%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 10−11
+400%
2−3
−400%
Counter-Strike 2 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+550%
2−3
−550%
Fortnite 12−14
+1100%
1−2
−1100%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+600%
2−3
−600%
Valorant 10−12
+450%
2−3
−450%

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Dota 2 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

1440p
High Preset

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

This is how Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS and Qualcomm Adreno 680 compete in popular games:

  • Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS is 457% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Battlefield 5, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS is 2000% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS is ahead in 43 tests (83%)
  • there's a draw in 9 tests (17%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 11.02 2.22
Chip lithography 4 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 40 Watt 7 Watt

Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS has a 396.4% higher aggregate performance score, and a 75% more advanced lithography process.

Qualcomm Adreno 680, on the other hand, has 471.4% lower power consumption.

The Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS 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 SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS
SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS
Qualcomm Adreno 680
Adreno 680

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.


2.1 13 votes

Rate Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 38 votes

Rate Qualcomm Adreno 680 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.