Radeon 680M vs R6 (Mullins)

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R6 (Mullins) and Radeon 680M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

R6 (Mullins)
2014
0.64

680M outperforms R6 (Mullins) by a whopping 2242% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1193353
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data20.54
ArchitectureGCN 1.1 (2014)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code nameMullinsRembrandt+
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date29 April 2014 (10 years ago)3 January 2023 (1 year 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 cores128768
Core clock speed500 MHz2000 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2200 MHz
Number of transistorsno data13,100 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data50 Watt
Texture fill rateno data105.6
Floating-point processing powerno data3.379 TFLOPS
ROPsno data32
TMUsno data48
Ray Tracing Coresno data12

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 4.0 x8
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 dataSystem Shared
Maximum RAM amountno dataSystem Shared
Memory bus width64 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speedno dataSystem Shared
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

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (FL 12_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Modelno data6.7
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data2.0
Vulkan-1.3

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.

R6 (Mullins) 0.64
Radeon 680M 14.99
+2242%

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.

R6 (Mullins) 2258
Radeon 680M 43225
+1814%

3DMark Ice Storm GPU

Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.

R6 (Mullins) 20511
Radeon 680M 359776
+1654%

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 HD1−2
−3600%
37
+3600%
1440p0−117
4K-0−111

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−1200%
39
+1200%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−875%
35−40
+875%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−1067%
35−40
+1067%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−867%
29
+867%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−4600%
45−50
+4600%
Hitman 3 5−6
−540%
32
+540%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−682%
85−90
+682%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−850%
55−60
+850%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
−183%
85−90
+183%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−875%
35−40
+875%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−1067%
35−40
+1067%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−600%
21
+600%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−4600%
45−50
+4600%
Hitman 3 5−6
−500%
30
+500%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−682%
85−90
+682%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−683%
47
+683%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−300%
40−45
+300%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
−183%
85−90
+183%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−875%
35−40
+875%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−1067%
35−40
+1067%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−467%
17
+467%
Hitman 3 5−6
−440%
27
+440%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−291%
43
+291%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−567%
40
+567%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−140%
24
+140%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
+66.7%
18
−66.7%

1440p
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−2600%
27−30
+2600%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 18−20
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−1000%
11
+1000%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−1900%
20−22
+1900%
Hitman 3 6−7
−233%
20−22
+233%
Horizon Zero Dawn 3−4
−1067%
35−40
+1067%
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2
−10400%
100−110
+10400%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−867%
27−30
+867%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−900%
10−11
+900%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 8−9

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−650%
14−16
+650%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 38
+0%
38
+0%
Battlefield 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Metro Exodus 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 31
+0%
31
+0%
Battlefield 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Metro Exodus 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 27
+0%
27
+0%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Metro Exodus 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27
+0%
27
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 17
+0%
17
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Hitman 3 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Metro Exodus 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 13
+0%
13
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4
+0%
4
+0%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 14
+0%
14
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

This is how R6 (Mullins) and Radeon 680M compete in popular games:

  • Radeon 680M is 3600% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the R6 (Mullins) is 67% faster.
  • in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Radeon 680M is 10400% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • R6 (Mullins) is ahead in 1 test (1%)
  • Radeon 680M is ahead in 34 tests (49%)
  • there's a draw in 35 tests (50%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.64 14.99
Recency 29 April 2014 3 January 2023
Chip lithography 28 nm 6 nm

Radeon 680M has a 2242.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, and a 366.7% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon 680M is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R6 (Mullins) 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.


AMD Radeon R6 (Mullins)
Radeon R6 (Mullins)
AMD Radeon 680M
Radeon 680M

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.


No user ratings yet.

Rate Radeon R6 (Mullins) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2 953 votes

Rate Radeon 680M 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.