AMD Radeon 680M vs NVIDIA N1 20SM Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database currently holds no direct head-to-head benchmark results between the AMD Radeon 680M and the NVIDIA N1 20SM. The head-to-head comparison table is empty, with zero recorded wins for either part. This absence of direct measurement data forces an analysis based on the available individual benchmark scores and architectural specifications.

For the AMD Radeon 680M, the recorded data includes three benchmark results. In 3DMark Steel Nomad (DX12), it scores 378 points. Its Geekbench OpenCL score reaches 23,468, while the Vulkan result comes in at 21,965. These figures produce an average benchmark score of 15,270, placing the integrated GPU at the 57th percentile among all GPUs in the database. The nearest rivals in this score range are instructive: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580 averages 15,283, a delta of -0.1% relative to the 680M, and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 also averages 15,290, another -0.1% delta. On the other side, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM averages 15,199, which is 0.5% slower, and the AMD Radeon RX 7600 averages 15,171, 0.7% slower. These deltas are all within one percentage point, indicating that the 680M sits in a tightly clustered performance band around the 15,200 to 15,290 average score range.

The NVIDIA N1 20SM presents a different situation. Its benchmark array is empty, and its average benchmark score is recorded as 0. Its percentile ranking sits at 50, which is below the 680M's 57th percentile. The N1 20SM has no nearest rivals listed in the database. This means the data does not support a direct numerical comparison of their computed performance. However, the specification differences between the two are substantial, and the available architectural data allows for a qualitative projection of where each part might excel.

Where Each One Wins

Without direct head-to-head results, the wins must be inferred from the recorded specifications and the 680M's standalone benchmark scores. The AMD Radeon 680M demonstrates a measurable capability in the database's benchmark suite. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 23,468 and Vulkan score of 21,965 indicate a functional level of compute performance that places it in the 57th percentile overall. The 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 378, while lower in absolute terms, still contributes to an average that rivals discrete GPUs like the RTX 2060 and GTX 580 within a fraction of a percent. The data shows the 680M performs within a narrow band of these older discrete cards, which suggests it can handle similar workloads at comparable settings.

The NVIDIA N1 20SM has no recorded benchmark scores, so its win profile is entirely speculative from the database's perspective. Its architectural parameters, however, point to areas of potential advantage. The N1 20SM carries 2,560 shading units, 160 texture mapping units, 20 ray tracing cores, and 80 tensor cores. It also has a dedicated 128 GB LPDDR5X memory pool on a 256-bit bus with 273.2 GB/s of bandwidth. This memory configuration is fundamentally different from the 680M's system-shared memory, which has a bandwidth listed as "System Dependent." In workloads that are memory-bound or require large resident datasets, the N1 20SM's fixed high-bandwidth memory would likely provide a structural advantage, though the database records no scores to confirm this.

Architecture Differences

The two integrated GPUs come from fundamentally different architectural generations. The AMD Radeon 680M uses the RDNA 2.0 architecture, built on TSMC's 6 nm process node. Its chip is designated Rembrandt+, and it belongs to the Navi II IGP generation, specifically the Rembrandt Mobile line. The die size measures 208 mm², and the transistor count is 13,100 million, yielding a transistor density of 63.0 million per square millimeter. The RDNA 2.0 design includes 12 ray tracing cores and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

The NVIDIA N1 20SM uses the Blackwell 2.0 architecture, fabricated on TSMC's 5 nm node. Its chip is labeled GB20B, and it belongs to the Blackwell IGP generation under the N1x family. The die size is considerably larger at 382 mm², though the transistor count is listed as unknown, and no density figure is provided. The Blackwell design includes 20 ray tracing cores and 80 tensor cores, the latter being absent from the 680M's specification sheet. Notably, the N1 20SM's API support is marked as N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan in the database. This suggests a different software stack or driver model, which could affect compatibility with existing applications.

The process node difference (6 nm versus 5 nm) is the only manufacturing distinction recorded. The 680M's transistor density of 63.0M per mm² is a computed figure based on its die size and transistor count. The N1 20SM's larger die at 382 mm², combined with an unknown transistor count, prevents any density comparison. The clock behavior also differs: the 680M has a base clock of 2000 MHz and a boost clock of 2200 MHz, while the N1 20SM has a much lower base of 741 MHz but a higher boost of 2346 MHz. This wide base-to-boost spread on the N1 20SM might indicate aggressive power management or a design that relies on boosting under load.

Specification Differences

The specification sheets reveal several key differences beyond the architecture. The shading unit count is a major separator: the N1 20SM has 2,560 shading units versus the 680M's 768. Texture mapping units follow the same pattern, with 160 on the N1 20SM versus 48 on the 680M. However, the raster operation units (ROPs) favor the 680M, which has 32 ROPs compared to 24 on the N1 20SM. This ROP advantage contributes to the 680M's higher pixel rate of 70.40 GPixel/s, while the N1 20SM achieves 56.30 GPixel/s.

The texture rate reverses this: the N1 20SM reaches 375.4 GTexel/s, while the 680M manages 105.6 GTexel/s. The floating-point performance shows a 3.55x advantage for the N1 20SM, with 12.01 TFLOPS of FP32 versus 3.379 TFLOPS for the 680M. The FP16 figures differ in ratio as well: the 680M lists 6.758 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio, while the N1 20SM lists 12.01 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio.

Memory is another stark contrast. The 680M uses system-shared memory with a system-dependent bandwidth. The N1 20SM has a dedicated 128 GB LPDDR5X pool on a 256-bit bus, delivering 273.2 GB/s. The memory clock for the N1 20SM is recorded as 1067 MHz with an 8.5 Gbps effective rate. The 680M's memory clock is simply listed as "System Shared."

The bus interface also differs: the 680M uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the N1 20SM uses PCIe 5.0 x16. The power draw is recorded as 50 W TDP for the 680M, while the N1 20SM's TDP is unknown. Both are integrated GPUs (IGP) with no power connectors and no suggested PSU. The display outputs also differ: the 680M is "Portable Device Dependent," while the N1 20SM lists a single HDMI output. The release dates are far apart: the 680M was released on 2023-01-02, while the N1 20SM is dated 2026-05-31, over three years later. The production status for both is listed as Active.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute performance according to the database?

A: The NVIDIA N1 20SM lists 12.01 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 12.01 TFLOPS of FP16 at a 1:1 ratio, while the AMD Radeon 680M lists 3.379 TFLOPS FP32 and 6.758 TFLOPS FP16 at a 2:1 ratio.

Q: Do the two GPUs have any shared architectural features?

A: Both are integrated GPUs with no power connectors and no suggested PSU. Both are manufactured by TSMC, though on different process nodes (6 nm for the 680M, 5 nm for the N1 20SM). Both have ray tracing cores, with the 680M having 12 and the N1 20SM having 20.

Q: How does the memory configuration differ between the two?

A: The AMD Radeon 680M uses system-shared memory with a system-dependent bandwidth and bus width. The NVIDIA N1 20SM has a dedicated 128 GB LPDDR5X memory pool on a 256-bit bus with a fixed bandwidth of 273.2 GB/s.

Q: What do the benchmark scores show for the AMD Radeon 680M?

A: The 680M scores 378 in 3DMark Steel Nomad (DX12), 23,468 in Geekbench OpenCL, and 21,965 in Geekbench Vulkan. Its average benchmark score is 15,270, placing it at the 57th percentile among all GPUs in the database.

Q: Does the NVIDIA N1 20SM have any recorded benchmark scores?

A: No. The database lists an empty benchmark array, an average benchmark score of 0, and a percentile ranking of 50. There are no nearest rivals recorded for this part.

Q: Which GPU has a higher pixel rate?

A: The AMD Radeon 680M has a pixel rate of 70.40 GPixel/s, which is higher than the NVIDIA N1 20SM's 56.30 GPixel/s, despite the N1 20SM having more shading units and texture mapping units.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear split between measured performance and architectural potential. The AMD Radeon 680M is the only one of the two with actual benchmark results in the database. Its average score of 15,270 places it within 0.1% of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580 and RTX 2060, and it edges out the RTX 3050 OEM by 0.5% and the RX 7600 by 0.7%. These are tight margins, confirming that the 680M performs at the level of those older discrete GPUs, which is a strong result for an integrated part. The 57th percentile ranking reflects this competitive standing.

The NVIDIA N1 20SM has no measured data to support a performance claim. Its 50th percentile ranking, despite the lack of scores, and its zero average benchmark score mean the database cannot confirm any real-world performance advantage. The specifications suggest a very different design: 2,560 shading units, 160 TMUs, 80 tensor cores, 12.01 TFLOPS of FP32, and a dedicated 273.2 GB/s memory system. These numbers are substantially higher than the 680M's on paper. However, the database contains no evidence that these specifications translate into benchmark wins.

For a user relying strictly on recorded data, the AMD Radeon 680M is the only part with demonstrated performance. It has verified scores, a known TDP of 50 W, and a release date in early 2023. The NVIDIA N1 20SM, dated for mid-2026, remains an unmeasured quantity. Its architectural features indicate a potentially higher ceiling, particularly in memory bandwidth and texture throughput, but the absence of any benchmark results or rival comparisons means the data cannot substantiate a pick in its favor. The verdict from the database is straightforward: the 680M is the proven performer, while the N1 20SM is a specification sheet awaiting validation.