AMD Radeon HD 8690M vs NVIDIA GeForce GT 1010 Comparison

# NVIDIA GeForce GT 1010 vs AMD Radeon HD 8690M

The NVIDIA GeForce GT 1010 and AMD Radeon HD 8690M represent two distinct eras of mobile and entry-level desktop graphics, and the benchmark data shows a clear but narrow overall winner. In the sole Geekbench OpenCL test, the GT 1010 scores 6,698 points against the HD 8690M's 6,137, a 9.1% advantage that places the NVIDIA part at the 38th percentile of all GPUs while the AMD card sits at the 36th percentile. The GT 1010's nearest rival is the AMD Radeon R7 M370 at 6,764 points (1% ahead), while the HD 8690M's closest competitor is the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 at 6,117 points, with the AMD card leading by just 0.3%. Neither GPU is a performance leader by modern standards, but the data indicates that the GT 1010 holds a consistent edge in raw compute throughput, making it the safer choice for users who prioritize OpenCL performance over architectural longevity.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the benchmark results, the NVIDIA GeForce GT 1010 is the superior product for compute-oriented workloads. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 6,698 outperforms the AMD Radeon HD 8690M's 6,137 by 9.1%, and it also edges out three of its four nearest rivals in the database. The GT 1010 ranks at the 38th percentile versus the HD 8690M's 36th, meaning it outperforms a slightly larger share of the GPU landscape. For users running OpenCL-accelerated applications such as video encoding, physics simulation, or general-purpose GPU compute, the GT 1010 delivers measurably higher performance per benchmark point.

The AMD Radeon HD 8690M, however, should not be dismissed entirely. Its 6,137 score places it within 1% of the NVIDIA RTX A400 (6,078) and the NVIDIA GeForce MX230 (6,077), and it actually leads the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 by 0.3%. This suggests that the HD 8690M remains competitive with much newer integrated and entry-level discrete solutions despite its 2013 release date. The data indicates the HD 8690M is adequate for legacy systems or users who already own the hardware, but for a new purchase, the GT 1010's higher score and newer Pascal architecture make it the logical choice. The GT 1010 also wins the only head-to-head benchmark, giving it a 1–0 record in direct comparisons.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA GeForce GT 1010 wins the only available benchmark category, Geekbench OpenCL, with a score of 6,698 against the HD 8690M's 6,137. This 9.1% delta is the sole head-to-head result in the data, so the GT 1010's advantage is comprehensive across the tested workload. The GT 1010 also holds a strong position relative to its other rivals: it trails the AMD Radeon R7 M370 by only 1%, leads the AMD Radeon R7 M460 by 1.3%, and leads the AMD Radeon HD 7730M by 1.8%. This consistency suggests the GT 1010 is well-tuned for OpenCL compute, likely benefiting from its higher memory bandwidth and pixel rate.

The AMD Radeon HD 8690M, while losing the head-to-head, demonstrates its own competitive niche. Its nearest rival list includes the NVIDIA RTX A400 and GeForce MX230, both of which it edges out by 1%, and the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200, which it leads by 0.3%. This indicates the HD 8690M can still hold its own against significantly newer hardware in OpenCL workloads, likely due to its 320 shading units—a higher count than many contemporaries. However, the HD 8690M's only loss in its rival group is to the AMD Radeon HD 6950, which scores 6,210 (1.2% higher). For users with existing HD 8690M hardware, the card remains usable, but for any new deployment, the GT 1010's superior benchmark score makes it the preferred option.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are built on fundamentally different architectures that explain their performance characteristics. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 1010 uses the GP108 chip built on the Pascal architecture, manufactured on a 14 nm process at Samsung. This chip packs 1,800 million transistors into a 74 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 24.3 million per square millimeter. The AMD Radeon HD 8690M, by contrast, uses the Sun chip based on the older GCN 1.0 architecture, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. Its 690 million transistors occupy a 56 mm² die, giving a transistor density of just 12.3 million per square millimeter—roughly half the density of the NVIDIA part.

Memory subsystems also differ significantly. The GT 1010 features 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 64-bit bus, running at 1502 MHz (6 Gbps effective), producing 48.06 GB/s of bandwidth. The HD 8690M also has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 64-bit bus, but at 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective), yielding only 32.00 GB/s—a 33% deficit in bandwidth. This explains much of the GT 1010's benchmark advantage, as OpenCL workloads often stress memory throughput. The GT 1010's pixel rate of 11.74 GPixel/s and texture rate of 23.49 GTexel/s both exceed the HD 8690M's 7.800 GPixel/s and 19.50 GTexel/s, further reinforcing its compute superiority.

The shading architectures differ in configuration but not necessarily in capability. The GT 1010 has 256 shading units, 16 texture mapping units, and 8 ROPs, delivering 751.6 GFLOPS of FP32 compute. The HD 8690M has 320 shading units, 20 TMUs, and 8 ROPs, but its lower clocks (925 MHz base, 975 MHz boost versus 1228 MHz base, 1468 MHz boost for the GT 1010) result in only 624.0 GFLOPS of FP32 performance. The HD 8690M's higher unit counts cannot compensate for its much lower clock speeds. Both GPUs lack ray tracing and tensor cores. The GT 1010 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the HD 8690M supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170, giving the NVIDIA part a slight API advantage.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GT 1010 delivers 751.6 GFLOPS of FP32 compute, compared to the AMD Radeon HD 8690M's 624.0 GFLOPS. This 20% advantage in theoretical compute, combined with its higher clock speeds (1468 MHz boost versus 975 MHz), explains its 9.1% lead in the Geekbench OpenCL benchmark.

Q: How do the memory bandwidth figures compare?

A: The GT 1010 offers 48.06 GB/s of memory bandwidth, while the HD 8690M provides 32.00 GB/s—a 50% advantage for the NVIDIA card. Both use 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 64-bit bus, but the GT 1010's higher memory clock (1502 MHz versus 1000 MHz) is the decisive factor.

Q: Which GPU has better API support?

A: The GT 1010 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The HD 8690M supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The NVIDIA part has a slight edge in both DirectX and Vulkan versions.

Q: How do these GPUs compare to their nearest rivals?

A: The GT 1010 is within 1% of the AMD Radeon R7 M370 (6,764 score) and leads the R7 M460 by 1.3%. The HD 8690M is within 0.3% of the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 and leads the NVIDIA RTX A400 and GeForce MX230 by 1% each.

Q: What is the transistor density difference?

A: The GT 1010 uses a 14 nm process from Samsung with 24.3 million transistors per mm², while the HD 8690M uses a 28 nm process from TSMC with 12.3 million per mm². The newer process node allows the GT 1010 to pack 1,800 million transistors into a 74 mm² die, versus 690 million in 56 mm² for the AMD card.

Q: Which GPU is better for modern gaming?

A: Based on the available data, the GT 1010 is better positioned due to its higher pixel rate (11.74 GPixel/s versus 7.800 GPixel/s), higher texture rate (23.49 GTexel/s versus 19.50 GTexel/s), and superior OpenCL score. However, neither GPU is designed for demanding modern titles, as both rank below the 40th percentile of all GPUs.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct comparison available is the Geekbench OpenCL test, where the NVIDIA GeForce GT 1010 scores 6,698 against the AMD Radeon HD 8690M's 6,137. This 561-point difference represents a 9.1% victory for the GT 1010, and it is the sole benchmark in the head-to-head dataset. The GT 1010's win is decisive, but the margin is not overwhelming, indicating that the HD 8690M remains a capable compute device despite its age.

Examining the underlying specifications clarifies this result. The GT 1010's FP32 throughput of 751.6 GFLOPS outpaces the HD 8690M's 624.0 GFLOPS by 20.4%, yet the actual benchmark delta is only 9.1%. This gap suggests that OpenCL performance is not purely compute-bound; memory bandwidth plays a substantial role. The GT 1010's 48.06 GB/s versus the HD 8690M's 32.00 GB/s is a 50% advantage, which likely helps in memory-intensive OpenCL kernels. Conversely, the HD 8690M's higher shading unit count (320 versus 256) and TMU count (20 versus 16) partially compensate for its lower clocks, preventing an even larger defeat.

The GT 1010 also demonstrates stronger performance relative to its own rival group. It trails the AMD Radeon R7 M370 by just 1% (6,764 versus 6,698) and leads the R7 M460 by 1.3% (6,612) and the HD 7730M by 1.8% (6,581). This places the GT 1010 in a tight cluster of mid-range mobile and entry-level desktop GPUs, all within roughly 2% of each other. The HD 8690M, meanwhile, sits in a slightly lower performance tier, with its 6,137 score narrowly beating the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 (6,117) and the NVIDIA RTX A400 (6,078) by 1% or less. The HD 8690M's only rival loss is to the AMD Radeon HD 6950 (6,210), which leads by 1.2%.

In practical terms, the GT 1010's 9.1% benchmark lead translates to faster OpenCL execution times for compute tasks, but the difference is modest enough that users with an existing HD 8690M system may not notice a dramatic upgrade. The GT 1010's newer Pascal architecture, smaller process node, and higher memory bandwidth all contribute to its win, but the HD 8690M's GCN 1.0 design still holds up reasonably well in synthetic compute benchmarks. For users choosing between the two, the data clearly favors the GT 1010, but neither card is a high-performance solution by current standards—both rank in the bottom half of the GPU database.