AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 Comparison

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT is the superior performer in every head-to-head comparison available, delivering dramatic generational improvements over the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680. The RX 5500 XT posts a perfect 3-0 win record, with margins ranging from 150% to nearly 600% across compute and graphics APIs.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking result is in the Geekbench Metal test, where the RX 5500 XT scores 54,842 against the GTX 680’s 7,897. That is a 594.5% advantage, meaning the AMD card delivers nearly seven times the Metal performance. This is not a marginal improvement; it is a complete paradigm shift in compute capability, driven by the architectural leap from 2012-era Kepler to 2019-era RDNA.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 5500 XT again dominates with a score of 46,965 versus 16,906 for the GTX 680. The 177.8% delta shows that even in a cross-vendor API like OpenCL, the newer AMD architecture holds a massive edge in raw throughput. The GTX 680’s 3.250 TFLOPS FP32 figure is simply outclassed by the RX 5500 XT’s 5.196 TFLOPS, and the benchmark confirms this theoretical advantage translates into real-world compute wins.

The Vulkan results follow the same pattern. The RX 5500 XT scores 44,191, which is 150.4% higher than the GTX 680’s 17,646. This test is particularly relevant for modern gaming, as Vulkan is a low-overhead API that scales with architectural efficiency. The RX 5500 XT’s RDNA 1.0 design, with its 7 nm process and 40.5M transistors per square millimeter, clearly executes Vulkan workloads far more efficiently than the 28 nm Kepler design.

The overall average benchmark scores reinforce this trend. The RX 5500 XT averages 14,692 points across all tests, placing it in the 57th percentile of all GPUs. The GTX 680 averages 14,150 points, landing in the 55th percentile. While the percentile gap is narrow, the RX 5500 XT’s nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770 (14,747, a -0.4% delta) and the NVIDIA Quadro M2000 (14,532, a 1.1% delta), showing it sits in a competitive mid-range tier. The GTX 680’s nearest rivals include the NVIDIA Tesla K10 (14,029, a 0.9% delta) and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 Ti (14,277, a -0.9% delta), indicating it performs similarly to cards from much later generations despite its age.

Architecture Differences

The fundamental gap between these two cards is architectural. The RX 5500 XT uses the Navi 14 chip built on RDNA 1.0 architecture, fabricated on a 7 nm TSMC process. It packs 6,400 million transistors into a 158 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 40.5M per square millimeter. The GTX 680 uses the GK104 chip on the Kepler architecture, fabricated on a 28 nm TSMC process. It contains 3,540 million transistors spread across a much larger 294 mm² die, with a transistor density of just 12.0M per square millimeter. The RX 5500 XT achieves more than three times the transistor density, which explains its superior performance per watt and per square millimeter.

Clock speeds tell a similar story. The RX 5500 XT runs at a 1607 MHz base clock and boosts to 1845 MHz, with a game clock of 1717 MHz. The GTX 680 is significantly slower, with a 1006 MHz base and 1058 MHz boost. This 57% boost-clock advantage gives the AMD card a substantial head start in any frequency-sensitive workload.

Memory configurations diverge sharply. The RX 5500 XT has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective). The GTX 680 has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, providing 192.3 GB/s at 1502 MHz (6 Gbps effective). Although the GTX 680 has a wider bus, the newer GDDR6 standard on the RX 5500 XT yields 16.5% more bandwidth. The RX 5500 XT also has twice the memory capacity, which is critical for modern textures and higher resolutions.

Compute resources are distributed differently. The RX 5500 XT has 1,408 shading units, 88 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 32 render output units (ROPs). The GTX 680 has more shading units (1,536) and more TMUs (128), but the same 32 ROPs. Despite having fewer units, the RX 5500 XT achieves higher fill rates: 59.04 GPixel/s versus 33.86 GPixel/s for pixel rate, and 162.4 GTexel/s versus 135.4 GTexel/s for texture rate. This is a direct result of the much higher clock speeds on the AMD card.

The RX 5500 XT also supports newer API versions. It offers DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The GTX 680 is limited to DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175. The higher DirectX feature level and newer Vulkan revision on the RX 5500 XT enable more advanced rendering techniques and better driver optimization for contemporary games.

The Verdict

The data clearly favors the AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT for nearly every use case. If you are building a system for modern gaming, content creation, or compute workloads, the RX 5500 XT is the only rational choice. Its 594.5% lead in Metal, 177.8% lead in OpenCL, and 150.4% lead in Vulkan leave no room for debate. The GTX 680’s only advantages are its larger bus width (256-bit versus 128-bit) and its higher shading unit count (1,536 versus 1,408), but these specifications do not translate into benchmark wins.

The GTX 680 may still be relevant for legacy DirectX 9 or DirectX 10 workloads, where its older architecture might have specific optimizations, but the available benchmark data does not include such tests. In every test where both cards have scores, the RX 5500 XT wins outright. The GTX 680’s average benchmark score of 14,150 places it in the same percentile range as the RX 5500 XT, but this is misleading: the GTX 680 has only three benchmark entries (Metal, OpenCL, Vulkan), while the RX 5500 XT has eleven, including DirectX tests where it scores competitively (Passmark DirectX 9: 133, DirectX 11: 56, DirectX 12: 40).

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every measurable specification. The RX 5500 XT uses a 7 nm process versus 28 nm for the GTX 680. Transistor count is 6,400 million versus 3,540 million. Die size is 158 mm² versus 294 mm². The RX 5500 XT has higher clocks: 1607/1845 MHz versus 1006/1058 MHz. Memory is 4 GB GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus versus 2 GB GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus. Bandwidth is 224.0 GB/s versus 192.3 GB/s. The RX 5500 XT has 1,408 shading units, 88 TMUs, and 32 ROPs; the GTX 680 has 1,536 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. Pixel rates are 59.04 GPixel/s versus 33.86 GPixel/s. Texture rates are 162.4 GTexel/s versus 135.4 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 5.196 TFLOPS versus 3.250 TFLOPS. The RX 5500 XT supports FP16 at 10.39 TFLOPS (2:1), while the GTX 680 has no FP16 support listed. TDP is 130 W versus 195 W. Power connectors are 1x 8-pin versus 2x 6-pin. Suggested PSU is 300 W versus 450 W. Bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x8 versus PCIe 3.0 x16. Display outputs are 1x HDMI 2.0b and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a versus 2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, and 1x DisplayPort 1.2. The RX 5500 XT measures 180 mm (7.1 inches) in length; the GTX 680 is 256 mm (10.1 inches) long, 111 mm (4.4 inches) tall, and 38 mm (1.5 inches) wide.

FAQ

Q: Which card has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT, with 224.0 GB/s versus 192.3 GB/s for the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680. The RX 5500 XT achieves this on a narrower 128-bit bus using GDDR6, while the GTX 680 uses a wider 256-bit bus with GDDR5.

Q: How much faster is the RX 5500 XT in Vulkan?

A: The RX 5500 XT scores 44,191 in Geekbench Vulkan, which is 150.4% higher than the GTX 680’s 17,646. This indicates the AMD card is roughly 2.5 times faster in Vulkan workloads.

Q: Does the GTX 680 have more shading units?

A: Yes, the GTX 680 has 1,536 shading units compared to 1,408 for the RX 5500 XT. However, the RX 5500 XT’s higher clock speeds (1845 MHz boost versus 1058 MHz boost) more than compensate, as shown by its higher pixel and texture rates.

Q: What is the transistor density difference?

A: The RX 5500 XT has a transistor density of 40.5M per mm², while the GTX 680 has 12.0M per mm². This is a 3.4x advantage for the AMD card, enabled by its 7 nm process versus the 28 nm process used by the GTX 680.

Q: Which card supports newer API versions?

A: The RX 5500 XT supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The GTX 680 supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175. The RX 5500 XT has a higher DirectX feature level and newer Vulkan revision.

Q: What is the average benchmark score difference?

A: The RX 5500 XT averages 14,692 points across all benchmarks, while the GTX 680 averages 14,150 points. The RX 5500 XT sits in the 57th percentile of all GPUs, versus the 55th percentile for the GTX 680.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT wins in every benchmark category where both cards have results. In Metal, it is 594.5% faster, making it the clear choice for macOS or iOS development environments that rely on Metal compute. In OpenCL, it is 177.8% faster, which benefits scientific computing, video encoding, and any OpenCL-accelerated application. In Vulkan, it is 150.4% faster, making it the superior option for modern Linux gaming and Vulkan-based game engines like those used in Doom Eternal or Red Dead Redemption 2.

The RX 5500 XT also wins on efficiency. It has a lower TDP (130 W versus 195 W), requires a smaller power supply (300 W versus 450 W), and uses a single 8-pin connector instead of two 6-pin connectors. This makes it easier to install in compact systems with limited power delivery. Its shorter length (180 mm versus 256 mm) further improves compatibility with small form factor cases.

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 has no benchmark wins in the available data. Its theoretical advantages — more shading units, more TMUs, wider memory bus — do not translate into victories in any test. However, for users running legacy software that predates modern APIs, the GTX 680’s older architecture may have specific driver optimizations that are not captured in these benchmarks. Its 2 GB memory capacity is also lower, which could limit it to older games or lower resolutions. In the data provided, there is no scenario where the GTX 680 outperforms the RX 5500 XT.