AMD Radeon 680M vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 SUPER Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon 680M records an average benchmark score of 15270, while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 SUPER records 3075. The AMD part holds a substantial lead in this aggregate metric.

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 SUPER scores 3075, versus 378 for the AMD Radeon 680M. The NVIDIA part wins by a delta of -87.7 percent from AMD's perspective, meaning the RTX 5080 SUPER is roughly 8.1 times faster in this specific workload.

Q: What is the transistor and die size difference between the two?

A: The AMD Radeon 680M uses 13,100 million transistors on a 208 mm² die, while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 SUPER uses 45,600 million transistors on a 378 mm² die. The NVIDIA chip has a transistor density of 120.6M per mm² versus 63.0M per mm² for AMD.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units and ray tracing cores?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 SUPER has 10,752 shading units and 84 RT cores. The AMD Radeon 680M has 768 shading units and 12 RT cores. NVIDIA also fields 336 tensor cores, while the AMD part lists no tensor core count.

Q: What are the memory specifications for each GPU?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 SUPER features 24 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 256-bit bus with 1.02 TB/s bandwidth. The AMD Radeon 680M uses system shared memory, with bandwidth listed as system dependent.

Q: What are the power and interface differences?

A: The AMD Radeon 680M has a TDP of 50 W and uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 SUPER has a TDP of 415 W, uses a PCIe 5.0 x16 interface, and requires a single 16-pin power connector.

The Verdict

The data indicates two GPUs aimed at completely different segments. The AMD Radeon 680M is an integrated graphics processor with a 50 W TDP, designed for mobile systems where power efficiency and compactness matter. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 SUPER is a dual-slot discrete card with a 415 W TDP, a 24 GB GDDR7 frame buffer, and a PCIe 5.0 x16 connection. The recorded benchmarks confirm the NVIDIA part dominates in raw 3D rendering performance, scoring 3075 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 versus 378 for the AMD IGP.

The AMD Radeon 680M holds a high average benchmark score of 15270, which places it in the 57th percentile of all GPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 at 15290 (delta -0.1 percent) and the AMD Radeon RX 7600 at 15171 (delta 0.7 percent). The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 SUPER, by contrast, sits in the 19th percentile with an average score of 3075, and its nearest rivals are much lower-end parts: the NVIDIA Quadro P1000 at 3163 (delta -2.8 percent) and the Intel Arc Pro B60 at 3182 (delta -3.4 percent). This percentile gap is curious: the RTX 5080 SUPER is clearly the faster GPU in the head-to-head test, yet its percentile rank is lower because the database likely includes many high-scoring parts that the 680M does not compete against.

The choice between these two depends entirely on the use case. For a compact, low-power integrated solution in a portable device, the AMD Radeon 680M is the only sensible option. For a desktop system requiring maximum 3D performance, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 SUPER is the unequivocal choice based on the benchmark data. The 680M's 3.379 TFLOPS FP32 throughput and 70.40 GPixel/s pixel rate cannot match the RTX 5080 SUPER's 56.28 TFLOPS and 293.1 GPixel/s. The verdict writes itself: the RTX 5080 SUPER for performance, the 680M for integration and efficiency.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains one direct head-to-head benchmark between these two GPUs: 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 SUPER scores 3075, while the AMD Radeon 680M scores 378. The delta is -87.7 percent when measured from AMD's side, meaning the NVIDIA part outperforms the AMD IGP by a factor of approximately 8.1. This is not a close contest; it is a categorical difference in rendering capability.

The AMD Radeon 680M's other benchmark results provide context. In Geekbench OpenCL, it scores 23468, and in Geekbench Vulkan, it scores 21965. These numbers are not available for the RTX 5080 SUPER in the current data, so no direct comparison can be made there. The average benchmark scores, however, tell a different story than the single 3DMark test. The 680M's average of 15270 is nearly five times higher than the RTX 5080 SUPER's 3075. This discrepancy likely reflects the composition of the benchmark suite: the 680M's Geekbench scores are strong enough to pull its average well above the RTX 5080 SUPER's single 3DMark result. The RTX 5080 SUPER's percentile rank of 19 versus the 680M's 57 reinforces this pattern.

The nearest rival data for each GPU adds further nuance. The 680M's closest competitor is the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060, which averages 15290, just 0.1 percent higher. The RTX 5080 SUPER's closest competitor is the Intel Arc Pro B60 at 3182, which is 3.4 percent higher. These rival comparisons show that the 680M sits in a performance tier populated by mid-range discrete GPUs from several generations ago, while the RTX 5080 SUPER's single recorded benchmark places it near much older or lower-tier parts in the database. The head-to-head result, however, is unambiguous: in the one test where both are measured, the RTX 5080 SUPER wins decisively.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every measurable specification. The AMD Radeon 680M uses a 6 nm process node from TSMC, while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 SUPER uses a 5 nm node, also from TSMC. Transistor counts are 13,100 million versus 45,600 million, and die sizes are 208 mm² versus 378 mm². The transistor density is 63.0M per mm² for AMD and 120.6M per mm² for NVIDIA.

Clock speeds differ substantially. The 680M has a base clock of 2000 MHz and a boost clock of 2200 MHz. The RTX 5080 SUPER has a base clock of 2295 MHz and a boost clock of 2617 MHz. Memory configurations are entirely different: the 680M uses system shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth, while the RTX 5080 SUPER has 24 GB of GDDR7 on a 256-bit bus with 1.02 TB/s of bandwidth.

Compute resources diverge sharply. The 680M has 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The RTX 5080 SUPER has 10,752 shading units, 336 TMUs, and 112 ROPs. Ray tracing cores number 12 versus 84, and tensor cores are absent from the AMD part while the NVIDIA part has 336. Pixel rates are 70.40 GPixel/s versus 293.1 GPixel/s, and texture rates are 105.6 GTexel/s versus 879.3 GTexel/s. FP32 throughput is 3.379 TFLOPS versus 56.28 TFLOPS, and FP16 is 6.758 TFLOPS (2:1) versus 56.28 TFLOPS (1:1).

Power and physical specifications differ just as much. The 680M draws 50 W, has no power connectors, and is an IGP with portable-device-dependent display outputs. The RTX 5080 SUPER draws 415 W, requires a single 16-pin connector, is dual-slot, and measures 304 mm by 137 mm by 40 mm. It outputs through 1x HDMI 2.1b and 3x DisplayPort 2.1b. The bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x8 for AMD and PCIe 5.0 x16 for NVIDIA.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon 680M is built on the RDNA 2.0 architecture and belongs to the Navi II IGP generation, with the chip codename Rembrandt+. It is manufactured on a 6 nm process by TSMC. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 SUPER uses the Blackwell 2.0 architecture, belongs to the GeForce 50 series, and uses the GB203 chip on a 5 nm process, also from TSMC.

The 680M's RDNA 2.0 design is an integrated graphics solution, meaning its memory subsystem is shared with the host system. Its FP16 throughput is 6.758 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio relative to FP32, indicating a packed math path. It has 12 RT cores for ray tracing acceleration but no tensor cores. The RTX 5080 SUPER, by contrast, has 84 RT cores and 336 tensor cores, and its FP16 throughput matches its FP32 at 56.28 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, suggesting a different compute strategy.

The 680M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, as does the RTX 5080 SUPER. The API support is identical, which means software compatibility is not a differentiator. The architectural gap is instead about scale and specialization: the RTX 5080 SUPER has roughly 14 times the shading units, 7 times the RT cores, and 16.7 times the FP32 throughput of the 680M. The 680M's transistor density is lower despite a smaller absolute transistor count, reflecting its integrated nature and lower power envelope. The RTX 5080 SUPER's higher density and larger die allow for the massive compute and memory resources recorded in the data.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon 680M wins in scenarios defined by power efficiency and integration. Its 50 W TDP, lack of power connectors, and IGP form factor make it suitable for portable devices where space and thermal limits are constrained. Its average benchmark score of 15270 and 57th percentile ranking show that it performs respectably relative to the full GPU database, especially in compute-oriented tests like Geekbench OpenCL (23468) and Geekbench Vulkan (21965). The 680M's nearest rivals include the GeForce RTX 2060 and Radeon RX 7600, both discrete GPUs, which indicates that this integrated part can hold its own in certain workloads.

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 SUPER wins in raw rendering performance. Its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 3075 crushes the 680M's 378. It offers 24 GB of GDDR7 memory with 1.02 TB/s bandwidth, 10,752 shading units, 84 RT cores, and 336 tensor cores. The FP32 throughput of 56.28 TFLOPS and pixel rate of 293.1 GPixel/s are in a different class entirely. The RTX 5080 SUPER also has a higher base and boost clock, a wider 256-bit memory bus, and a PCIe 5.0 x16 interface. For any workload that stresses the GPU, whether 3D rendering, ray tracing, or compute, the RTX 5080 SUPER is the clear winner based on the recorded data.

The 680M's wins are not about performance but about context. It is the only option for a system that cannot accommodate a dual-slot, 415 W discrete card. The RTX 5080 SUPER is the only option for a system that needs maximum performance. The percentile data reinforces this split: the 680M sits at the 57th percentile of all GPUs, while the RTX 5080 SUPER sits at the 19th, yet the head-to-head benchmark shows the RTX 5080 SUPER dominating. This inversion is a reminder that percentile rankings reflect the entire database population, not just direct comparisons. The data shows two GPUs that do not truly compete; they occupy separate niches, and each wins within its own domain.