AMD Radeon RX 7700 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded benchmark data splits cleanly between these two cards, but only one direction is well populated. Across the shared test suite, the AMD Radeon RX 7700 wins the only direct head-to-head comparison available: Geekbench OpenCL. That result is decisive, with the RX 7700 scoring 106,028 against the GTX 680’s 16,906, a 527.2% advantage. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680, by contrast, has no recorded wins over the RX 7700 in any overlapping test.

Looking at the broader database entries, the RX 7700’s average benchmark score of 15,852 places it in the 58th percentile of all GPUs, while the GTX 680’s average of 14,150 sits at the 55th percentile. The RX 7700 also has a much deeper benchmark portfolio: nine recorded tests spanning DirectX 9 through 12, OpenCL, 2D, 3D, and compute workloads, versus only three tests for the GTX 680 (Metal, OpenCL, Vulkan). This means the RX 7700’s standing is built on a wider range of modern API workloads, whereas the GTX 680’s data is thinner and skews toward legacy or cross-platform interfaces.

For use-case splits, the RX 7700 dominates in any scenario that stresses raw throughput, modern API support, or high-resolution texturing. Its Passmark G3D score of 20,974 and GPU compute score of 10,963 indicate strong rasterization and general-purpose compute performance. The GTX 680, with its 2012-era architecture and 2 GB frame buffer, cannot compete in these areas; its only recorded scores are 7,897 in Metal, 16,906 in OpenCL, and 17,646 in Vulkan, none of which approach the RX 7700’s numbers.

The GTX 680’s niche, if any, would be legacy compatibility: it supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.2.175, but its feature set is frozen at an older generation. The RX 7700’s DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4 support make it the clear choice for any current or forward-looking workload.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from radically different eras and design philosophies. The AMD Radeon RX 7700 uses the Navi 32 chip on RDNA 3.0 architecture, fabricated on TSMC’s 5 nm process. It packs 28,100 million transistors into a 346 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 81.2 million per square millimeter. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 uses the GK104 chip on Kepler architecture, built on TSMC’s 28 nm process, with 3,540 million transistors on a 294 mm² die and a density of 12.0 million per square millimeter. The density gap is enormous: the RX 7700 fits more than six times as many transistors per area.

The RX 7700 has 2,560 shading units, 160 texture mapping units, 96 ROPs, and 40 ray tracing cores. The GTX 680 has 1,536 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, with no ray tracing support. Clock speeds tell a similar story: the RX 7700 runs at a 1900 MHz base and 2459 MHz boost, while the GTX 680 sits at 1006 MHz base and 1058 MHz boost. Memory is another chasm: the RX 7700 offers 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 624.1 GB/s bandwidth, while the GTX 680 has 2 GB of GDDR5 on the same 256-bit bus but only 192.3 GB/s.

Feature-wise, the RX 7700 supports PCIe 4.0 x16 and outputs HDMI 2.1a, two DisplayPort 2.1, and one USB Type-C. The GTX 680 uses PCIe 3.0 x16 and offers two DVI, one HDMI 1.4a, and one DisplayPort 1.2. The RX 7700’s power connectors are dual 8-pin with a 550 W suggested PSU, while the GTX 680 uses dual 6-pin with a 450 W suggestion. Both are dual-slot designs, but the RX 7700 is longer (267 mm vs 256 mm), taller (135 mm vs 111 mm), and wider (50 mm vs 38 mm).

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only directly comparable benchmark in the database is Geekbench OpenCL. The RX 7700 scores 106,028, which is 527.2% higher than the GTX 680’s 16,906. That delta is not a marginal improvement; it is a generational leap expressed in a single number. For context, the RX 7700’s nearest rivals in the overall database include the AMD Radeon R9 370X (average score 15,862, delta -0.1%), the AMD Radeon RX 9060 (16,014, -1%), the AMD Radeon Pro W5500 (15,679, +1.1%), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti (16,129, -1.7%). The GTX 680’s nearest rivals include the NVIDIA Tesla K10 (14,029, +0.9%), the GeForce GTX 1070 Ti (14,277, -0.9%), the Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics (14,315, -1.2%), and the AMD Radeon Vega 11 (14,352, -1.4%). This shows the RX 7700 sits in a performance tier roughly triple that of the GTX 680’s peers.

Within the RX 7700’s own benchmark suite, the Passmark results are telling. DirectX 9 score is 261, DirectX 10 is 92, DirectX 11 is 186, and DirectX 12 is 96. The G2D score is 1,206, G3D is 20,974, and GPU compute is 10,963. These numbers indicate that the card is strongest in 3D rendering and compute tasks, with 2D performance being a smaller fraction of the overall rating. The GTX 680 has no equivalent Passmark entries, so no direct comparison is possible there, but its Metal score of 7,897 and Vulkan score of 17,646 are far below the RX 7700’s OpenCL output.

The data also shows that the RX 7700’s average benchmark score of 15,852 is only slightly below that of the RTX 3060 Ti (16,129, delta -1.7%), a card from a much newer NVIDIA generation. This places the RX 7700 in solid mid-range territory, while the GTX 680’s 14,150 average is closer to integrated graphics solutions like the Vega 11 (14,352, -1.4%).

The Verdict

From the recorded data, the AMD Radeon RX 7700 is the clear winner in every measurable aspect. It has a higher average benchmark score (15,852 vs 14,150), a better percentile ranking (58th vs 55th), and a 527.2% lead in the sole shared benchmark. Its architecture is newer, denser, and faster across all relevant metrics: shading units, TMUs, ROPs, clock speeds, memory size, bandwidth, and API support. The GTX 680 is end-of-life, while the RX 7700 is active in production.

Who should pick the GTX 680? Only someone constrained to a legacy system with PCIe 3.0, dual DVI outputs, or a specific need for 2012-era driver behavior. Its 2 GB frame buffer and 192.3 GB/s bandwidth are inadequate for modern titles at any serious resolution. The 55th percentile ranking and nearest rivals (Tesla K10, GTX 1070 Ti, Iris Xe MAX, Vega 11) all underscore that the GTX 680 is now entry-level at best.

Who should pick the RX 7700? Anyone building a current system that needs 16 GB of GDDR6, ray tracing acceleration, and full DirectX 12 Ultimate support. Its 58th percentile ranking places it just below the RTX 3060 Ti, which is a well-regarded mid-range card. The 5 nm process and 81.2M transistors per mm² density explain its efficiency advantages: 200 W TDP versus 195 W for the GTX 680, despite vastly higher performance. The RX 7700 is the only rational choice from the data.

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7700 has an average benchmark score of 15,852, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 has 14,150.

Q: How much faster is the RX 7700 in the only shared test?

A: In Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 7700 scores 106,028 versus the GTX 680’s 16,906, a 527.2% advantage.

Q: Does the GTX 680 support ray tracing?

A: No, the GTX 680 has no ray tracing cores. The RX 7700 has 40 ray tracing cores.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference?

A: The RX 7700 has 16 GB of GDDR6, while the GTX 680 has 2 GB of GDDR5.

Q: Which card is still in production?

A: The RX 7700 is marked as active, while the GTX 680 is end-of-life.

Q: What is the GTX 680’s launch MSRP?

A: The GTX 680 had a launch MSRP of 499 USD.

Specification Differences

| Field | AMD Radeon RX 7700 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 |

|---|---|---|

| Architecture | RDNA 3.0 | Kepler |

| Process Node | 5 nm | 28 nm |

| Transistors | 28,100 million | 3,540 million |

| Die Size | 346 mm² | 294 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 81.2M / mm² | 12.0M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1900 MHz | 1006 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2459 MHz | 1058 MHz |

| Memory Size | 16 GB | 2 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |

| Memory Bus Width | 256 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 624.1 GB/s | 192.3 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 2560 | 1536 |

| TMUs | 160 | 128 |

| ROPs | 96 | 32 |

| RT Cores | 40 | None |

| Pixel Rate | 236.1 GPixel/s | 33.86 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 393.4 GTexel/s | 135.4 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 25.18 TFLOPS | 3.250 TFLOPS |

| TDP | 200 W | 195 W |

| Power Connectors | 2x 8-pin | 2x 6-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 550 W | 450 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1a, 2x DisplayPort 2.1, 1x USB Type-C | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, 1x DisplayPort 1.2 |

| DirectX Support | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12 (11_0) |

| Vulkan Support | 1.4 | 1.2.175 |

| Production Status | Active | End-of-life |

| Release Date | 2025-09-17 | 2012-03-21 |

| Dimensions (LxHxW) | 267 x 135 x 50 mm | 256 x 111 x 38 mm |