AMD Radeon 680M vs AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT Comparison

The AMD Radeon 680M and the AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT occupy opposite ends of the GPU spectrum, and the benchmark data reflects a clear split: the RX 9070 XT dominates modern DirectX 12 and Vulkan workloads, while the 680M posts a surprising lead in one OpenCL compute test. The RX 9070 XT wins 2 of 3 head-to-head benchmarks, but the 680M’s victory in Geekbench OpenCL is significant enough to warrant a closer look at what each part is designed to do.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 9070 XT is the unequivocal winner for native 3D rendering and modern graphics APIs. In the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, it scores 7260 against the 680M’s 378, a delta of -94.8% from the 680M’s perspective. This is not a marginal gap; it is a generational chasm. The RX 9070 XT also wins decisively in Vulkan, scoring 65879 versus 21965, a 66.7% advantage. Any workload that relies on DirectX 12 Ultimate or Vulkan, which includes virtually all current AAA games and GPU-accelerated rendering engines, belongs to the RX 9070 XT.

The 680M wins only one benchmark, but it is a notable one: Geekbench OpenCL, where it scores 23468 against the RX 9070 XT’s 17428, a 34.7% lead. This suggests that in compute tasks that specifically leverage OpenCL, the 680M’s architecture, despite having far fewer shading units, is more efficient per unit of work. This could be relevant for certain scientific computing, video encoding, or machine learning inference tasks that still rely on OpenCL rather than Vulkan or DirectX. The 680M’s integrated nature, sharing system memory, might also benefit from lower latency in specific memory access patterns, though the data does not directly confirm that.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is vast. The 680M is built on RDNA 2.0, using the Rembrandt+ chip, and is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) on a 6 nm TSMC process. It packs 13,100 million transistors on a 208 mm² die, with a transistor density of 63.0 million per mm². The RX 9070 XT, by contrast, is RDNA 4.0, using the Navi 48 chip, fabricated on a 4 nm TSMC process. It holds 53,900 million transistors on a 357 mm² die, achieving a density of 151.0 million per mm². The RX 9070 XT has more than four times the transistor count and more than double the density.

The compute resources differ by a similar margin. The 680M has 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, 32 ROPs, and 12 ray tracing cores. The RX 9070 XT has 4096 shading units, 256 TMUs, 128 ROPs, and 64 ray tracing cores. That is a 5.3x increase in shading units, a 5.3x increase in TMUs, a 4x increase in ROPs, and a 5.3x increase in ray tracing cores. The RX 9070 XT also features a 16 GB GDDR6 memory subsystem on a 256-bit bus, delivering 644.6 GB/s of bandwidth. The 680M uses system-shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth, which is a fundamental limitation for high-resolution textures and heavy data streaming.

Clock speeds tell a story of their own. The 680M has a base clock of 2000 MHz and a boost of 2200 MHz. The RX 9070 XT has a lower base clock of 1660 MHz but a much higher boost of 2970 MHz, with a game clock of 2400 MHz. The RX 9070 XT also has a dedicated memory clock of 2518 MHz (20.1 Gbps effective). The power envelope is equally divergent: the 680M is rated at 50 W TDP with no power connectors, while the RX 9070 XT is rated at 304 W TDP and requires two 8-pin power connectors, with a suggested 700 W PSU. The bus interface also differs: the 680M uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the RX 9070 XT uses PCIe 5.0 x16.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 result is the most lopsided. The RX 9070 XT scores 7260, which is 19.2 times the 680M’s 378. This is a pure rasterization and DirectX 12 workload, and the RX 9070 XT’s massive advantage in shading units, TMUs, and ROPs translates directly into a massive frame rate advantage. The delta of -94.8% means the 680M is essentially not competitive in this test.

The Geekbench Vulkan result shows a similar but slightly less extreme picture. The RX 9070 XT scores 65879, which is exactly 3 times the 680M’s 21965. The delta is -66.7%. Vulkan is a low-overhead API that scales well with raw compute resources, so the RX 9070 XT’s 4096 shading units and 64 ray tracing cores are fully utilized.

The outlier is Geekbench OpenCL. Here, the 680M scores 23468, beating the RX 9070 XT’s 17428 by 34.7%. This is counterintuitive given the hardware disparity. One possible explanation is that the RX 9070 XT’s OpenCL driver is not optimized to the same degree as its Vulkan or DirectX drivers, or that the test itself favors the 680M’s memory architecture. The 680M’s system-shared memory might allow for faster data transfer in certain compute patterns, especially if the test does not require large memory allocations. Regardless of the cause, the data is clear: in this specific OpenCL workload, the 680M outperforms the RX 9070 XT by a wide margin.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in DirectX 12 games?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT. In the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 benchmark, it scores 7260 versus the 680M’s 378, a 94.8% advantage.

Q: Does the integrated 680M ever beat the discrete RX 9070 XT?

A: Yes. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the 680M scores 23468, which is 34.7% higher than the RX 9070 XT’s 17428.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference?

A: The RX 9070 XT has 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus with 644.6 GB/s bandwidth. The 680M uses system-shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth.

Q: How do the ray tracing capabilities compare?

A: The RX 9070 XT has 64 ray tracing cores, while the 680M has 12. This is a 5.3x difference in dedicated ray tracing hardware.

Q: What are the power requirements?

A: The 680M is rated at 50 W TDP with no power connectors. The RX 9070 XT is rated at 304 W TDP, requires two 8-pin power connectors, and has a suggested PSU of 700 W.

Q: Which GPU has a higher transistor count?

A: The RX 9070 XT has 53,900 million transistors, compared to the 680M’s 13,100 million. The RX 9070 XT also uses a smaller 4 nm process node versus the 680M’s 6 nm.

The Verdict

The data points to a straightforward conclusion for gamers and content creators: the RX 9070 XT is the only choice for modern 3D workloads. Its 19.2x advantage in 3DMark Steel Nomad and 3x advantage in Vulkan make it the clear winner for DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan-based applications. The RX 9070 XT’s 4096 shading units, 256 TMUs, and 128 ROPs, combined with 16 GB of GDDR6 memory and 644.6 GB/s bandwidth, provide the resources needed for high-resolution textures and complex scenes. The 680M, despite its 57th percentile ranking versus the RX 9070 XT’s 55th, simply cannot keep up in these tests.

However, the 680M’s 34.7% OpenCL victory is not a fluke. It indicates that for certain compute tasks that are not optimized for Vulkan or DirectX, the 680M can be more efficient. This makes the 680M a viable option for specific scientific or compute workloads that rely on OpenCL, especially in a low-power, integrated form factor. The 680M’s 50 W TDP and lack of power connectors make it suitable for thin-and-light laptops, while the RX 9070 XT’s 304 W TDP and dual 8-pin connectors demand a desktop chassis with robust cooling and a 700 W PSU.

For a desktop gaming rig, the RX 9070 XT is the obvious pick. For a portable device where power efficiency is paramount and the workload is primarily OpenCL-based compute, the 680M has a genuine edge. The two GPUs are not really competitors; they serve different markets. The RX 9070 XT is a high-performance discrete GPU, while the 680M is a capable integrated solution with a specific compute strength.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon 680M | AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT |

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

| Architecture | RDNA 2.0 | RDNA 4.0 |

| Process Node | 6 nm | 4 nm |

| Transistors | 13,100 million | 53,900 million |

| Die Size | 208 mm² | 357 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 63.0M / mm² | 151.0M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 2000 MHz | 1660 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2200 MHz | 2970 MHz |

| Game Clock | N/A | 2400 MHz |

| Memory Clock | System Shared | 2518 MHz (20.1 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | System Shared | 16 GB |

| Memory Type | System Shared | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus Width | System Shared | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | System Dependent | 644.6 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 768 | 4096 |

| TMUs | 48 | 256 |

| ROPs | 32 | 128 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | 12 | 64 |

| Pixel Rate | 70.40 GPixel/s | 380.2 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 105.6 GTexel/s | 760.3 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 3.379 TFLOPS | 48.66 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 6.758 TFLOPS (2:1) | 48.66 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 50 W | 304 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | Dual-slot |

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

| Suggested PSU | N/A | 700 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | PCIe 5.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 1x HDMI 2.1b, 3x DisplayPort 2.1a |

| Release Date | 2023-01-02 | 2025-03-05 |

| Launch MSRP | N/A | 599 USD |