AMD Radeon 680M vs AMD Radeon RX 7700 Comparison

The AMD Radeon RX 7700 and the AMD Radeon 680M occupy opposite ends of the graphics spectrum, and the benchmark data reflects that chasm clearly. The RX 7700 is a discrete, dual-slot add-in card built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture, while the 680M is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) from the RDNA 2.0 generation, designed for portable devices. Across the two shared benchmark tests, the RX 7700 wins decisively, but the 680M’s position in the overall percentile ranking is surprisingly close, suggesting that its role as an IGP is not without merit in specific contexts.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most dramatic separation occurs in the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, a modern DirectX 12 workload. The AMD Radeon RX 7700 scores 2865 points, while the AMD Radeon 680M manages just 378 points. This translates to a 657.9% lead for the RX 7700, a margin that underscores the fundamental difference between a dedicated 200 W GPU and a 50 W integrated solution. In this test, the RX 7700 delivers over seven and a half times the performance of the 680M, making it the clear choice for any workload that stresses raw rasterization and compute under DX12.

The second shared benchmark, Geekbench OpenCL, shows a similar but slightly less extreme outcome. The RX 7700 posts a score of 106028, compared to the 680M’s 23468, resulting in a 351.8% advantage for the discrete card. While the delta is still massive, the OpenCL test is less lopsided than Steel Nomad, suggesting that the 680M’s compute capabilities are relatively stronger than its gaming-oriented DX12 performance. Still, the RX 7700’s absolute score is more than four times higher, reinforcing its dominance in general-purpose GPU computing.

The RX 7700 also has a broader benchmark footprint in the data. It includes scores for PassMark DirectX 9 (261), DirectX 10 (92), DirectX 11 (186), DirectX 12 (96), G2D (1206), G3D (20974), and GPU Compute (10963). The 680M, by contrast, only has three recorded benchmarks, with no PassMark entries. This absence of data for the 680M in legacy DirectX tests means the comparison is limited, but where data exists, the RX 7700 wins every single time. The wins count stands at 2 for the RX 7700 and 0 for the 680M, with no ties.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is generational and structural. The AMD Radeon RX 7700 uses the Navi 32 chip, built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture, with a 5 nm process node from TSMC. It contains 28,100 million transistors on a 346 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 81.2M / mm². The 680M, in contrast, uses the Rembrandt+ chip, based on the older RDNA 2.0 architecture, fabricated on a 6 nm TSMC process. It has 13,100 million transistors on a 208 mm² die, with a lower density of 63.0M / mm². The RX 7700’s newer node and larger die give it nearly 2.14 times the transistor count, which directly enables its massive compute advantage.

Core configuration differences are equally stark. The RX 7700 features 2560 shading units, 160 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 96 render output units (ROPs). The 680M has only 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. This means the RX 7700 has 3.33 times the shading units, 3.33 times the TMUs, and 3 times the ROPs. Ray tracing hardware follows the same pattern: the RX 7700 includes 40 RT cores, while the 680M has just 12. Neither card has tensor cores, as the data lists them as null for both.

Clock speeds tell a nuanced story. The 680M has a higher base clock at 2000 MHz versus the RX 7700’s 1900 MHz, but the RX 7700 boosts higher at 2459 MHz compared to the 680M’s 2200 MHz. The RX 7700 also has a defined game clock of 2041 MHz, which the 680M lacks entirely. Memory is another major divider: the RX 7700 uses 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 624.1 GB/s of bandwidth, while the 680M relies on System Shared memory with a bus width and bandwidth described as System Dependent. The RX 7700’s dedicated memory pool is a critical advantage for texture-heavy workloads.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the AMD Radeon RX 7700 is the superior performer in every measured category. Its 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 2865 is more than seven times the 680M’s 378, and its Geekbench OpenCL score of 106028 is over four times higher. In terms of average benchmark score, the RX 7700 sits at 15852, while the 680M averages 15270, a difference of only 3.8% on aggregate. This narrow gap in average score is misleading, however, because it is skewed by the 680M’s limited test suite and the RX 7700’s inclusion of low-scoring legacy PassMark tests. On any shared modern workload, the RX 7700 wins by a wide margin.

For users who need a discrete GPU for gaming, rendering, or compute, the RX 7700 is the only viable option between the two. Its 200 W TDP and dual-slot design are acceptable trade-offs for its performance level. The 680M, with its 50 W TDP and IGP form factor, is not a competitor in this space; it is a fallback for systems without a discrete GPU. The percentile rankings support this: the RX 7700 sits at the 58th percentile against all GPUs, while the 680M is just one point lower at the 57th percentile. That single-point gap in percentile, despite the massive performance delta, suggests that the 680M’s integration into portable devices makes it a reasonable baseline for light workloads, but it cannot substitute for the RX 7700’s raw power.

Specification Differences

The following table highlights only the fields where the two GPUs explicitly differ in the data:

| Specification | AMD Radeon RX 7700 | AMD Radeon 680M |

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

| Architecture | RDNA 3.0 | RDNA 2.0 |

| Chip | Navi 32 | Rembrandt+ |

| Generation | Navi III (RX 7000) | Navi II IGP (Rembrandt Mobile) |

| Process Node | 5 nm | 6 nm |

| Transistors | 28,100 million | 13,100 million |

| Die Size | 346 mm² | 208 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 81.2M / mm² | 63.0M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1900 MHz | 2000 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2459 MHz | 2200 MHz |

| Game Clock | 2041 MHz | null |

| Memory Clock | 2438 MHz 19.5 Gbps effective | System Shared |

| Memory Size | 16 GB | System Shared |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | System Shared |

| Memory Bus Width | 256 bit | System Shared |

| Memory Bandwidth | 624.1 GB/s | System Dependent |

| Shading Units | 2560 | 768 |

| TMUs | 160 | 48 |

| ROPs | 96 | 32 |

| RT Cores | 40 | 12 |

| Pixel Rate | 236.1 GPixel/s | 70.40 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 393.4 GTexel/s | 105.6 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 25.18 TFLOPS | 3.379 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 25.18 TFLOPS (1:1) | 6.758 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 200 W | 50 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | IGP |

| Power Connectors | 2x 8-pin | None |

| Suggested PSU | 550 W | null |

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

| Display Outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1a, 2x DisplayPort 2.1, 1x USB Type-C | Portable Device Dependent |

| Dimensions (Length) | 267 mm 10.5 inches | null |

| Dimensions (Height) | 135 mm 5.3 inches | null |

| Dimensions (Width) | 50 mm 2 inches | null |

| Release Date | 2025-09-17 | 2023-01-02 |

| Predecessor | Navi II | Vega II IGP |

| Successor | Navi IV | Navi III IGP |

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7700 boosts to 2459 MHz, which is higher than the AMD Radeon 680M’s boost of 2200 MHz, despite the 680M having a slightly higher base clock of 2000 MHz versus 1900 MHz.

Q: What is the difference in FP32 compute performance?

A: The RX 7700 delivers 25.18 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the 680M provides 3.379 TFLOPS. This means the RX 7700 has approximately 7.45 times the single-precision compute throughput.

Q: How does the 680M fare in the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test?

A: The 680M scores 378 points, which is 657.9% lower than the RX 7700’s score of 2865. This test is the largest single performance gap between the two.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same DirectX and Vulkan versions?

A: Yes, both the RX 7700 and the 680M support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, according to the data.

Q: What is the transistor density of each chip?

A: The RX 7700’s Navi 32 chip has a transistor density of 81.2M / mm², while the 680M’s Rembrandt+ chip has a density of 63.0M / mm².

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The RX 7700 has an average benchmark score of 15852, compared to the 680M’s 15270. Despite this, the RX 7700’s percentile rank is only one point higher (58 versus 57).

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon RX 7700 wins in every scenario where performance is the primary metric. Its 25.18 TFLOPS FP32 throughput, 624.1 GB/s memory bandwidth, and 40 RT cores make it suitable for high-fidelity gaming, 3D rendering, and compute-heavy tasks like machine learning inference. The 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 2865 indicates it can handle modern DX12 titles at high settings, while its 16 GB GDDR6 frame buffer provides ample headroom for large textures and multi-tasking. The PassMark G3D score of 20974 and GPU Compute score of 10963 further cement its position as a workhorse for both graphics and general-purpose workloads.

The AMD Radeon 680M wins in the niche of ultra-portable, low-power computing. Its 50 W TDP and IGP form factor mean it requires no power connectors and fits into devices where a discrete card is impossible. Its Geekbench Vulkan score of 21965 shows it is not without capability in lighter graphics tasks, and its 3.379 TFLOPS FP32 is sufficient for basic media playback, office productivity, and older or less demanding games. For users who prioritize battery life, portability, and silence over raw performance, the 680M is the only choice. The RX 7700, with its 200 W TDP, dual-slot size, and 267 mm length, is physically and electrically incompatible with such systems. In short, the RX 7700 is for desktop performance, and the 680M is for integrated efficiency.