AMD Radeon 680M vs NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains only two head-to-head benchmark comparisons between the AMD Radeon 680M and the NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile, and the NVIDIA part wins both by a decisive margin. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RTX A2000 Mobile scores 56,518 against the Radeon 680M's 23,468, a delta of -58.5% for the AMD part. That means the NVIDIA GPU delivers roughly 2.4 times the raw compute throughput in this API. The gap is nearly identical in Geekbench Vulkan: the RTX A2000 Mobile posts 53,146 while the Radeon 680M manages 21,965, a -58.7% difference. Both results point to the same conclusion: in general-purpose compute and modern graphics APIs, the discrete-class RTX A2000 Mobile leaves the integrated Radeon 680M far behind.

Looking at the broader database averages, the RTX A2000 Mobile's average benchmark score is 13,821, while the Radeon 680M sits higher at 15,270. That is a curious inversion. The Radeon 680M's average is boosted by its strong Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan scores relative to its other recorded results, but the head-to-head tests show the NVIDIA part winning by over 58% in both cases. The RTX A2000 Mobile also has a much wider set of recorded tests, including PassMark DirectX 9, 10, 11, and 12, plus G2D, G3D, and GPU compute scores, which drag its average down compared to the AMD part's limited test set. The percentile rankings tell a similar story: the Radeon 680M sits at the 57th percentile of all GPUs, while the RTX A2000 Mobile is at the 55th percentile, meaning the AMD part is slightly better positioned relative to the entire database, despite losing the direct comparisons.

When placed against their nearest rivals, both GPUs are tightly clustered. The Radeon 680M's closest competitor is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580 with an average score of 15,283 (a -0.1% delta), and it also trades blows with the RTX 2060 (15,290, -0.1%), the RTX 3050 OEM (15,199, +0.5%), and the AMD Radeon RX 7600 (15,171, +0.7%). These are all within a single percentage point, indicating that the 680M performs at a level comparable to those older desktop cards. The RTX A2000 Mobile's nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon 660M (13,812, +0.1%), the RX 570X (13,871, -0.4%), the RX 7900 XT (13,745, +0.6%), and the NVIDIA Tesla K10 (14,029, -1.5%). Again, the spread is tiny, but the A2000 Mobile's average is lower than all but the RX 570X.

The head-to-head data is unambiguous: the RTX A2000 Mobile wins both recorded tests, and it wins them by a huge margin. There are no benchmark results in which the Radeon 680M comes out ahead. If you are choosing purely on measured performance in Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan, the NVIDIA part is the clear victor.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins the Geekbench OpenCL benchmark, and by how much?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile wins with a score of 56,518 against the AMD Radeon 680M's 23,468. The delta is -58.5%, meaning the AMD part scores less than half of the NVIDIA GPU.

Q: Is there any benchmark where the AMD Radeon 680M beats the RTX A2000 Mobile?

A: No. The database records two head-to-head tests (Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan), and the RTX A2000 Mobile wins both. The win count is 2 for NVIDIA and 0 for AMD.

Q: How does the RTX A2000 Mobile compare to its closest rivals in average score?

A: Its average benchmark score is 13,821. The nearest rival is the AMD Radeon 660M at 13,812 (a +0.1% delta), followed by the RX 570X at 13,871 (-0.4%), the RX 7900 XT at 13,745 (+0.6%), and the Tesla K10 at 14,029 (-1.5%). All are within 1.5% of each other.

Q: What is the Radeon 680M's average score relative to its nearest rivals?

A: The Radeon 680M averages 15,270. Its closest rival is the GeForce GTX 580 at 15,283 (-0.1%), with the RTX 2060 at 15,290 (-0.1%), the RTX 3050 OEM at 15,199 (+0.5%), and the RX 7600 at 15,171 (+0.7%). The differences are negligible.

Q: Which GPU has the higher percentile ranking among all GPUs in the database?

A: The AMD Radeon 680M ranks at the 57th percentile, while the NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile ranks at the 55th percentile. Despite losing both head-to-head tests, the 680M is positioned slightly better in the overall distribution.

Q: Does the RTX A2000 Mobile have more recorded benchmarks than the Radeon 680M?

A: Yes. The RTX A2000 Mobile has nine recorded benchmark scores: Geekbench OpenCL, Geekbench Vulkan, and seven PassMark tests (DirectX 9, 10, 11, 12, G2D, G3D, and GPU compute). The Radeon 680M has only three: 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, Geekbench OpenCL, and Geekbench Vulkan.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD Radeon 680M is an integrated graphics processor built on the RDNA 2.0 architecture, using the Rembrandt+ chip. It is fabricated on TSMC's 6 nm process, which is a mature node for the time. The NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile, by contrast, is a discrete-class mobile GPU based on the Ampere architecture, using the GA107 chip, and it is built on Samsung's 8 nm process. The process node difference is notable: the AMD part uses a smaller 6 nm node, which typically allows for better power efficiency per transistor, while the NVIDIA part uses a larger 8 nm node but compensates with a much higher transistor count in a similar die size.

The transistor counts differ significantly. The Radeon 680M packs 13,100 million transistors into a 208 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 63.0 million per square millimeter. The RTX A2000 Mobile has 8,700 million transistors on a 200 mm² die, for a density of 43.5 million per square millimeter. The AMD part is denser, which is consistent with its smaller process node. The die sizes are close, but the AMD chip crams nearly 50% more transistors into that space.

The compute architecture diverges sharply. The Radeon 680M has 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, 32 raster output units, and 12 ray tracing cores. It has no tensor cores. The RTX A2000 Mobile has 2,560 shading units, 80 TMUs, 48 ROPs, 20 RT cores, and 80 tensor cores. The NVIDIA part has over three times the shading units and more than triple the RT cores, plus dedicated tensor hardware for AI workloads. The AMD part's FP32 throughput is 3.379 TFLOPS, while the RTX A2000 Mobile reaches 8.637 TFLOPS. The NVIDIA GPU is also more efficient in FP16, delivering 8.637 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio, whereas the AMD part achieves 6.758 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio, meaning it halves its throughput for FP16 work.

Memory architecture is another major split. The Radeon 680M uses system shared memory, with no dedicated VRAM, no fixed bus width, and bandwidth that is system dependent. The RTX A2000 Mobile has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 192.0 GB/s of bandwidth. This dedicated memory is a critical advantage in sustained workloads, as it does not compete with the CPU for bandwidth. The clock speeds also differ: the AMD part runs at a base of 2000 MHz and boosts to 2200 MHz, while the NVIDIA part has a base of 1215 MHz and a boost of 1687 MHz, with memory clocked at 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective).

The power envelopes are very different. The Radeon 680M is rated at 50 W TDP, while the RTX A2000 Mobile is rated at 95 W TDP. Both are listed as IGP slot width with no power connectors, but the NVIDIA part draws nearly twice the power, which is typical for a discrete GPU.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in almost every measurable specification. The process node is 6 nm for AMD and 8 nm for NVIDIA. The foundry is TSMC for AMD and Samsung for NVIDIA. Transistor count is 13,100 million for AMD versus 8,700 million for NVIDIA, and die size is 208 mm² versus 200 mm². Transistor density is 63.0M per mm² for AMD versus 43.5M per mm² for NVIDIA.

Clock speeds: AMD runs at 2000 MHz base and 2200 MHz boost; NVIDIA runs at 1215 MHz base and 1687 MHz boost. Memory: AMD uses system shared memory with no dedicated size, type, bus width, or fixed bandwidth; NVIDIA has 4 GB GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 192.0 GB/s bandwidth. Shading units: 768 for AMD versus 2,560 for NVIDIA. TMUs: 48 versus 80. ROPs: 32 versus 48. RT cores: 12 versus 20. Tensor cores: none for AMD versus 80 for NVIDIA. Pixel rate: 70.40 GPixel/s for AMD versus 80.98 GPixel/s for NVIDIA. Texture rate: 105.6 GTexel/s for AMD versus 135.0 GTexel/s for NVIDIA. FP32: 3.379 TFLOPS for AMD versus 8.637 TFLOPS for NVIDIA. FP16: 6.758 TFLOPS (2:1) for AMD versus 8.637 TFLOPS (1:1) for NVIDIA.

TDP: 50 W for AMD versus 95 W for NVIDIA. Bus interface: PCIe 4.0 x8 for AMD versus PCIe 4.0 x16 for NVIDIA. Production status: AMD is Active, NVIDIA is End-of-life. Release date: AMD launched on 2023-01-02, NVIDIA on 2021-04-11. Predecessors: AMD's is Vega II IGP, NVIDIA's is Quadro Turing-M. Successors: AMD's is Navi III IGP, NVIDIA's is Ada-MW.

The APIs are identical: both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Display outputs are portable device dependent for both. Neither has a suggested PSU, and both have no power connectors.

The Verdict

The benchmark data is one-sided. The NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile wins both head-to-head tests by over 58%, and it does so with a higher TDP, dedicated VRAM, and a much larger compute footprint. If your priority is raw performance in Geekbench OpenCL or Vulkan, the RTX A2000 Mobile is the only rational choice. The Radeon 680M does not win a single recorded comparison.

However, the average benchmark scores tell a different story. The Radeon 680M has a higher average score (15,270) than the RTX A2000 Mobile (13,821), and it ranks at the 57th percentile versus the NVIDIA part's 55th. This is because the AMD GPU's limited test set skews its average upward, while the NVIDIA part's broader PassMark suite pulls its average down. If you rely solely on average scores and percentile rankings, the Radeon 680M looks like the better part, but the direct head-to-head results contradict that.

The production status also matters. The Radeon 680M is still Active, while the RTX A2000 Mobile is End-of-life. If you are building a new system today, the AMD part is still in production, whereas the NVIDIA part may be harder to source. The release dates reflect this: AMD launched in early 2023, NVIDIA in mid-2021.

For a practical buyer, the choice depends on what you value. If you need maximum compute performance in the two tested APIs, the RTX A2000 Mobile wins decisively. If you are looking for a part that is still in production, has a lower TDP (50 W versus 95 W), and sits at a higher percentile in the overall database, the Radeon 680M has merit. But the recorded head-to-head data leaves no ambiguity about which one is faster.

Where Each One Wins

NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile wins on raw compute performance. In Geekbench OpenCL, it scores 56,518 versus 23,468 for the Radeon 680M, a -58.5% delta. In Geekbench Vulkan, it scores 53,146 versus 21,965, a -58.7% delta. It also has a massive compute advantage on paper: 8.637 TFLOPS FP32 versus 3.379 TFLOPS, and 80 tensor cores versus none. The dedicated 4 GB GDDR6 memory with 192.0 GB/s bandwidth gives it a clear edge in memory-bound tasks.

AMD Radeon 680M wins on efficiency and production status. It runs at 50 W TDP versus 95 W for the NVIDIA part, making it far more suitable for thin-and-light laptops where power draw is critical. It is built on a smaller 6 nm process versus 8 nm, which contributes to that efficiency. It remains in Active production, while the RTX A2000 Mobile is End-of-life. Its average benchmark score of 15,270 is higher than the NVIDIA part's 13,821, and it ranks at the 57th percentile versus 55th.

The NVIDIA part also wins on feature set for professional workloads. The 80 tensor cores are absent from the AMD part entirely, making the RTX A2000 Mobile the only option for AI acceleration tasks. Its 20 RT cores versus 12 also give it an edge in ray tracing, though no ray tracing benchmark is recorded in the head-to-head data.

The AMD part wins on portability. The 50 W TDP and system shared memory mean it can be integrated directly into a processor, with no dedicated VRAM to manage. The RTX A2000 Mobile, despite being listed as IGP slot width, requires 95 W and has its own 4 GB memory pool, which is typical of a discrete part.

In short, the RTX A2000 Mobile is the performance winner in every recorded head-to-head test, and its architectural advantages in tensor cores, memory bandwidth, and FP32 throughput support that result. The Radeon 680M is the efficiency and longevity pick, with a lower power draw, a smaller process node, and an active production status, but it cannot match the NVIDIA part's compute muscle.