AMD Radeon 680M vs AMD Radeon RX Vega 11 Comparison

The AMD Radeon 680M and AMD Radeon RX Vega 11 are both integrated graphics processors, but they belong to completely different eras of AMD’s mobile and desktop IGP designs. The data shows a clear generational shift in performance, with the 680M leading in every shared benchmark by a wide margin. While the RX Vega 11 holds its own as a legacy part, the 680M’s architectural advantages and raw throughput numbers make it the superior option for modern workloads.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark results are unambiguous: the AMD Radeon 680M wins both head-to-head tests, securing a 2-0 record. There is no test in the data where the RX Vega 11 comes out ahead. The 680M’s victories are not narrow — they are decisive, with deltas of 87.4% and 62.2% in the two shared benchmarks. This suggests that the 680M is not just marginally faster but operates in a different performance tier altogether.

For users, this means the 680M is the clear choice for compute-heavy applications like OpenCL-accelerated tasks and Vulkan-based gaming or content creation. The RX Vega 11, by contrast, is an older part that was likely competitive in its day but now lags significantly. Its only benchmark win is in Geekbench Metal, where it scores 17,086, but the 680M has no Metal score listed, so that result cannot be compared directly. In every measurable head-to-head metric, the 680M dominates.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two IGPs is substantial. The 680M is built on TSMC’s 6 nm process node, while the RX Vega 11 uses GlobalFoundries’ 12 nm node. This process advantage alone helps explain the 680M’s higher clock speeds and efficiency. The 680M’s chip, Rembrandt+, packs 13,100 million transistors on a 208 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 63.0M / mm². The RX Vega 11’s Picasso chip has just 4,940 million transistors on a 210 mm² die, with a density of only 23.5M / mm². The 680M crams nearly three times as many transistors into a similar physical footprint.

The microarchitecture differs as well. The 680M uses RDNA 2.0, a modern gaming-focused architecture, while the RX Vega 11 is based on the older GCN 5.0. This is reflected in the feature sets: the 680M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, whereas the RX Vega 11 is limited to DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.3. The 680M also includes 12 ray tracing cores, a feature entirely absent from the RX Vega 11. While neither is a discrete GPU, the 680M’s RT support indicates a more forward-looking design.

Core counts differ too. The 680M has 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The RX Vega 11 has 704 shading units, 44 TMUs, but only 8 ROPs. That ROP disparity is stark — the 680M has four times the pixel output capability. Clock speeds are also far apart. The 680M runs at a base of 2000 MHz and boosts to 2200 MHz, while the RX Vega 11 idles at 300 MHz and boosts to just 1400 MHz. These differences compound into massive throughput gaps, which the benchmark scores reflect.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The shared benchmark results paint a stark picture of the performance gap. In Geekbench OpenCL, the 680M scores 23,468 against the RX Vega 11’s 12,525. That is an 87.4% advantage for the 680M, meaning it delivers nearly double the compute performance in this API. For any workload relying on OpenCL — such as video encoding, image processing, or physics simulations — the 680M is in a different league.

The Vulkan results are closer but still lopsided. The 680M posts 21,965, while the RX Vega 11 manages 13,543. That 62.2% delta shows the 680M’s RDNA 2.0 architecture scales better with modern graphics APIs. Vulkan is the preferred interface for many current games and emulators, so this advantage translates directly to real-world gaming performance. The RX Vega 11’s GCN 5.0 architecture, while competent, cannot match the newer design’s efficiency in this workload.

Beyond the head-to-head tests, the 680M’s average benchmark score of 15,270 places it in the 57th percentile of all GPUs. It sits within 0.1% of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580 and RTX 2060, and is 0.5% ahead of the RTX 3050 OEM. The RX Vega 11’s average score is 14,385, which lands in the 56th percentile. That is only slightly lower, but its nearest rivals include the GTX TITAN (0.1% ahead) and the GTX 965M (0.1% behind). The percentile gap between the two is just one point, but the raw score difference of 885 points is meaningful in compute tasks.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon 680M leads with an average benchmark score of 15,270, compared to the AMD Radeon RX Vega 11’s 14,385. This places the 680M in the 57th percentile of all GPUs, versus the 56th percentile for the RX Vega 11.

Q: How much faster is the 680M in OpenCL?

A: In Geekbench OpenCL, the 680M scores 23,468 against the RX Vega 11’s 12,525, a delta of 87.4%. This means the 680M delivers nearly double the OpenCL compute performance.

Q: Does the RX Vega 11 support ray tracing?

A: No. The RX Vega 11 has no ray tracing cores listed in the data. The 680M, in contrast, includes 12 ray tracing cores as part of its RDNA 2.0 architecture.

Q: What is the process node difference between the two?

A: The 680M is fabricated on TSMC’s 6 nm process, while the RX Vega 11 uses GlobalFoundries’ 12 nm node. The 680M also has a significantly higher transistor density at 63.0M / mm², versus 23.5M / mm² for the RX Vega 11.

Q: Which GPU has a higher pixel rate?

A: The 680M has a pixel rate of 70.40 GPixel/s, which is over six times higher than the RX Vega 11’s 11.20 GPixel/s. This is due to the 680M’s 32 ROPs versus the RX Vega 11’s 8 ROPs.

Q: Are there any benchmarks where the RX Vega 11 wins?

A: The RX Vega 11 has a Geekbench Metal score of 17,086, but the 680M has no Metal score listed for comparison. In all shared benchmarks (OpenCL and Vulkan), the 680M wins decisively.

The Verdict

The data is unequivocal. The AMD Radeon 680M is the superior part in every measurable shared test. It wins both head-to-head benchmarks with deltas of 87.4% and 62.2%, and its average score of 15,270 puts it in a higher percentile than the RX Vega 11. The 680M’s architectural advantages — RDNA 2.0, 6 nm process, 768 shading units, 32 ROPs, and ray tracing support — make it a far more capable IGP for modern workloads.

Who should pick the 680M? Anyone running OpenCL-accelerated tasks, Vulkan-based games, or applications that can leverage its 12 ray tracing cores. Its 87.4% lead in OpenCL and 62.2% lead in Vulkan mean it handles compute-heavy and graphics-intensive workloads with ease. The 680M also has a higher clock speed (2200 MHz boost versus 1400 MHz) and more than triple the transistor count, so it is built for sustained performance.

Who should pick the RX Vega 11? The data suggests almost no one, unless the workload is exclusively Metal-based, where the RX Vega 11 scores 17,086. But since the 680M has no Metal score, that comparison is moot. The RX Vega 11 is an end-of-life product from 2019, built on a 12 nm node with GCN 5.0. Its 56th percentile ranking and lower average score of 14,385 place it near the GTX TITAN and GTX 965M, but it cannot compete with the 680M’s performance tier. For any new purchase or upgrade, the 680M is the only rational choice based on the benchmark evidence.