AMD Radeon 680M vs AMD Radeon HD 8950M Comparison

FAQ

Q: How does the AMD Radeon 680M compare to the AMD Radeon HD 8950M in average benchmark score?

A: The Radeon 680M records an average benchmark score of 15270, while the HD 8950M scores 13376. This places the 680M 14.2% higher in aggregate performance, and it sits at the 57th percentile among all GPUs versus the 54th for the HD 8950M.

Q: Which GPU wins in OpenCL performance, and by how much?

A: The Radeon 680M wins decisively, scoring 23468 in Geekbench OpenCL against 13772 for the HD 8950M. That represents a 70.4% advantage for the integrated RDNA 2 part.

Q: What about Vulkan performance?

A: The same pattern holds. The 680M scores 21965 in Geekbench Vulkan, while the HD 8950M manages 12979, a 69.2% delta in favor of the newer chip.

Q: Are these GPUs from the same architecture generation?

A: No. The Radeon 680M uses RDNA 2.0 on a 6 nm TSMC process, while the HD 8950M uses GCN 2.0 on a 28 nm TSMC node. The 680M is from the Navi II IGP generation, whereas the HD 8950M belongs to the Solar System (HD 8900M) family.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: Both have 768 shading units and 48 texture mapping units. The difference lies in ROPs: the 680M has 32, double the 16 on the HD 8950M.

Q: How do their memory subsystems differ?

A: The HD 8950M has 2 GB of dedicated GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus with 88.00 GB/s bandwidth. The 680M uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth, meaning its memory performance scales with the host platform's RAM configuration.

Architecture Differences

The Radeon 680M and HD 8950M represent vastly different design eras. The 680M is built on RDNA 2.0 architecture, manufactured at 6 nm by TSMC, and integrates 13,100 million transistors across a 208 mm² die. The HD 8950M uses the older GCN 2.0 architecture, also from TSMC but on a 28 nm process, packing 2,080 million transistors into a 160 mm² die. Transistor density tells the story: the 680M achieves 63.0 million transistors per square millimeter, while the HD 8950M manages only 13.0 million.

The 680M's RDNA 2.0 design brings hardware ray tracing capability with 12 RT cores, a feature entirely absent from the HD 8950M. The newer chip also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, whereas the HD 8950M tops out at DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.2.170. Both support OpenGL 4.6.

Clock behavior diverges sharply. The 680M runs at a 2000 MHz base and 2200 MHz boost, while the HD 8950M has no recorded base or boost clock in the database. The older card's memory clock is listed at 1375 MHz with 5.5 Gbps effective data rate. The 680M's memory clock is system shared, so no fixed figure applies.

The compute pipelines differ in throughput despite identical shading unit counts. The 680M delivers 70.40 GPixel/s pixel fill and 105.6 GTexel/s texture fill, against 17.20 GPixel/s and 51.60 GTexel/s for the HD 8950M. FP32 compute reaches 3.379 TFLOPS on the 680M versus 1.651 TFLOPS on the HD 8950M. The 680M also supports FP16 at 6.758 TFLOPS (2:1), a capability the HD 8950M lacks entirely.

Power and interface specifications reflect their different roles. The 680M is an IGP with a 50 W TDP and no power connectors, using PCIe 4.0 x8. The HD 8950M is an MXM module drawing 100 W, connected via PCIe 3.0 x16. Production status also differs: the 680M remains active, while the HD 8950M is end-of-life.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records two direct benchmark comparisons, and the Radeon 680M wins both by substantial margins. In Geekbench OpenCL, the 680M scores 23468 against 13772 for the HD 8950M, a delta of 70.4%. This is a massive generational leap, roughly equivalent to the newer part delivering nearly double the raw compute throughput in a synthetic workload that stresses general-purpose compute.

The Vulkan result mirrors this. The 680M posts 21965, while the HD 8950M reaches 12979, a 69.2% advantage. Vulkan is a modern low-level API, and the RDNA 2.0 architecture's support for Vulkan 1.4 (versus 1.2.170 on GCN 2.0) likely contributes to the gap. The 680M's higher pixel and texture rates, 70.40 GPixel/s and 105.6 GTexel/s versus 17.20 and 51.60, respectively, align with these benchmark deltas.

The aggregate picture confirms the head-to-head results. The 680M's average benchmark score of 15270 places it near the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580 (15283, 0.1% lower) and the RTX 2060 (15290, 0.1% lower), while sitting slightly above the RTX 3050 OEM (15199, 0.5% higher) and the RX 7600 (15171, 0.7% higher). The HD 8950M's 13376 average puts it alongside the RX 5500M (13356, 0.2% higher), the FirePro M6100 (13354, 0.2% higher), the Radeon Pro 555 (13407, 0.2% lower), and the Radeon Pro 555X (13321, 0.4% higher).

What these numbers indicate is that the 680M competes in a different performance tier entirely. Its nearest rivals include desktop-class discrete GPUs from the GTX 500 and RTX 2000 series, while the HD 8950M's peers are mobile and professional parts from the same era. The 70%+ deltas in both OpenCL and Vulkan are not incremental improvements; they represent a complete architectural reset.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon 680M | AMD Radeon HD 8950M |

|---|---|---|

| Architecture | RDNA 2.0 | GCN 2.0 |

| Process Node | 6 nm | 28 nm |

| Transistors | 13,100 million | 2,080 million |

| Die Size | 208 mm² | 160 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 63.0M / mm² | 13.0M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 2000 MHz | Not listed |

| Boost Clock | 2200 MHz | Not listed |

| Memory Size | System Shared | 2 GB |

| Memory Type | System Shared | GDDR5 |

| Memory Bus | System Shared | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | System Dependent | 88.00 GB/s |

| ROPs | 32 | 16 |

| RT Cores | 12 | None |

| Pixel Rate | 70.40 GPixel/s | 17.20 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 105.6 GTexel/s | 51.60 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 3.379 TFLOPS | 1.651 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 6.758 TFLOPS (2:1) | Not listed |

| TDP | 50 W | 100 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | MXM Module |

| Power Connectors | None | Not listed |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |

| DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12 (12_0) |

| Vulkan | 1.4 | 1.2.170 |

| Production Status | Active | End-of-life |

| Release Date | 2023-01-02 | 2013-05-13 |

The release dates alone, nearly a decade apart, explain most of the specification gap. The 680M is a modern integrated part leveraging advanced process technology and architectural features like ray tracing. The HD 8950M is a dedicated mobile GPU from an older generation, with higher power draw and less efficient silicon.

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous. The Radeon 680M is the superior GPU in every recorded measurement. It wins both head-to-head tests, holds a higher average benchmark score, and ranks higher in the overall percentile distribution. The HD 8950M's only advantage is its dedicated 2 GB GDDR5 memory with fixed bandwidth, but that does not translate into competitive performance against the 680M's compute capabilities.

The 680M's 70.4% OpenCL and 69.2% Vulkan leads are too large to overcome with driver optimizations or workload tuning. The 680M also offers modern API support, including DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4, which matters for current software titles. The HD 8950M's DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.2.170 support limits its compatibility with future or demanding applications.

For anyone choosing between these two, the data points firmly toward the 680M. It delivers more performance at half the TDP (50 W versus 100 W), uses a smaller process node, and supports newer rendering features. The HD 8950M is end-of-life, while the 680M remains active in production.

Where Each One Wins

The Radeon 680M wins across every benchmark category in the database. Its strengths are most pronounced in compute-heavy workloads, as shown by the 70.4% OpenCL margin. This suggests it excels at general-purpose GPU tasks, including physics simulations, video encoding, and machine learning inference where FP16 support at 6.758 TFLOPS becomes relevant.

The 680M also dominates in Vulkan, a modern graphics API used in many current games and applications. The 69.2% delta indicates strong real-world rendering performance, especially at higher resolutions where pixel fill rate (70.40 GPixel/s) and texture throughput (105.6 GTexel/s) matter. Its 12 RT cores also enable hardware ray tracing, a feature the HD 8950M cannot offer.

The HD 8950M's niche is narrower. Its dedicated memory subsystem with 88.00 GB/s bandwidth and 2 GB capacity could be beneficial in specific legacy applications that depend on local VRAM rather than system shared memory. However, the benchmark data does not support any performance advantage from this configuration. The HD 8950M's 54th percentile ranking places it below the 680M's 57th, and its nearest rivals are all lower-tier parts.

In practical terms, the 680M is the choice for modern gaming, compute, and API compatibility. The HD 8950M is only relevant for systems that physically require an MXM module, a form factor constraint rather than a performance rationale. The data shows no scenario where the HD 8950M outperforms the 680M in recorded benchmarks.