AMD Radeon RX Vega 11 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 Comparison

The AMD Radeon RX Vega 11 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 represent two very different approaches to graphics hardware: one is a modern integrated processor from 2019, the other a dedicated discrete card from 2012. The benchmark data reveals a split decision, with each card claiming victory in different workloads. The average benchmark scores are remarkably close—14,385 for the AMD part against 14,150 for the NVIDIA—placing both within the 55th and 56th percentile of all GPUs. However, the individual test results tell a more nuanced story, showing that raw averages mask significant performance swings depending on the API or compute workload.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking result in the head-to-head comparison is the Geekbench Metal test. Here, the AMD Radeon RX Vega 11 scores 17,086, which is a massive 116.4% higher than the GTX 680's score of 7,897. This is not a marginal win; it is a complete rout. The AMD integrated GPU more than doubles the dedicated NVIDIA card's performance in this specific test. This result is particularly notable because Metal is a graphics API, suggesting that the Vega 11's architecture, despite being integrated, handles this workload with exceptional efficiency compared to the older Kepler design.

The situation reverses completely when looking at Geekbench OpenCL. The GTX 680 posts a score of 16,906, beating the Vega 11's 12,525 by a delta of -25.9% (from the AMD perspective). This means the NVIDIA card is roughly 35% faster in raw compute performance. This is a significant lead and aligns with the GTX 680's much higher shading unit count and memory bandwidth. The Vega 11's 704 shading units and system-shared memory simply cannot match the GTX 680's 1,536 shading units and dedicated 192.3 GB/s GDDR5 bandwidth in this compute-heavy benchmark.

The Vulkan test follows a similar pattern to OpenCL, though with a slightly smaller margin. The GTX 680 wins with a score of 17,646 versus the Vega 11's 13,543, a delta of -23.3%. This confirms that in modern, low-level graphics APIs, the older NVIDIA card holds a clear advantage. The GTX 680's architecture, while older, appears to scale better with Vulkan's explicit control model. The Vega 11's Vulkan support is listed as 1.3, which is newer than the GTX 680's 1.2.175, but the higher version number does not translate to better performance here.

Looking at the aggregate, the GTX 680 wins 2 out of 3 head-to-head benchmarks. However, the magnitude of the AMD's win in Metal is so large that it nearly erases the NVIDIA's two wins in the average score calculation. The data shows a clear performance bifurcation: the AMD part is specialized for Metal, while the NVIDIA part is superior in OpenCL and Vulkan. Neither card is a universal winner, and the choice between them depends heavily on the target application.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the benchmark data, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 is the more consistent performer across the tested workloads. It wins the OpenCL and Vulkan tests, which are common in professional compute and modern gaming scenarios, respectively. Its average benchmark score of 14,150 is only 1.6% lower than the AMD's 14,385, but its two decisive wins in the majority of tests make it the safer recommendation for general-purpose use. The GTX 680's wins are not small margins; they are substantial leads of 25.9% and 23.3%, indicating a robust performance advantage in those areas.

However, the AMD Radeon RX Vega 11 is the clear choice for any workload that relies on Apple's Metal API. Its 116.4% lead in the Metal benchmark is unprecedented in this comparison. This suggests that for macOS users or developers targeting Metal, the Vega 11 is the superior option. Its overall percentile ranking of 56 is also slightly higher than the GTX 680's 55, reflecting the inflated average score from the Metal result. The data does not support a universal verdict; instead, it points to a platform-specific recommendation.

For a user building a system today, the GTX 680's dedicated 2 GB of GDDR5 memory and 256-bit bus width provide a tangible advantage in memory-intensive tasks. The Vega 11's system-shared memory is a bottleneck that the benchmark numbers reflect. The GTX 680 also has a higher pixel rate (33.86 GPixel/s vs 11.20 GPixel/s) and texture rate (135.4 GTexel/s vs 61.60 GTexel/s), which are critical for traditional rasterization. The verdict leans toward the GTX 680 for most users, with the caveat that the Vega 11 is a specialist that excels in one specific, important area.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon RX Vega 11 wins exclusively in the Metal benchmark. This is its sole victory, but it is a decisive one. Any application, game, or compute task that uses Metal will run dramatically better on the Vega 11. The 116.4% performance delta means tasks will complete in roughly half the time on the AMD part. This makes the Vega 11 the obvious choice for users invested in the Apple ecosystem or developers optimizing for Metal. The data shows no other scenario where the AMD card comes out ahead.

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 wins in the OpenCL and Vulkan benchmarks. These are two of the most widely used APIs for cross-platform compute and graphics. OpenCL is common in scientific computing, video rendering, and other professional workloads. Vulkan is the foundation for many modern games on PC and Linux. The GTX 680's wins in these areas, with deltas of 25.9% and 23.3%, demonstrate a clear performance edge. Furthermore, the GTX 680's dedicated memory and higher texture and pixel rates suggest it will handle traditional gaming workloads better, even if those specific tests are not in the benchmark suite.

The split is clean: Metal favors AMD, while OpenCL and Vulkan favor NVIDIA. There is no overlap. The data does not show any test where both cards perform similarly. This makes the decision straightforward: choose the AMD for Metal-centric workloads and the NVIDIA for everything else. The GTX 680 also wins on raw specifications, with more shading units, TMUs, and ROPs, which supports its wins in the compute and modern graphics API tests.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX Vega 11 has an average benchmark score of 14,385, which is 1.6% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680's average of 14,150.

Q: How much faster is the AMD Radeon RX Vega 11 in the Metal benchmark?

A: The AMD Radeon RX Vega 11 scores 17,086 in Geekbench Metal, which is 116.4% higher than the GTX 680's score of 7,897.

Q: In which benchmarks does the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 outperform the AMD Radeon RX Vega 11?

A: The GTX 680 wins in Geekbench OpenCL with a score of 16,906 versus 12,525, and in Geekbench Vulkan with a score of 17,646 versus 13,543.

Q: How many benchmarks does each GPU win in the head-to-head comparison?

A: The AMD Radeon RX Vega 11 wins 1 benchmark (Metal), while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 wins 2 benchmarks (OpenCL and Vulkan).

Q: What is the percentile ranking of each GPU among all GPUs?

A: The AMD Radeon RX Vega 11 is in the 56th percentile, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 is in the 55th percentile.

Q: Which GPU has a higher memory bandwidth?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 has a memory bandwidth of 192.3 GB/s, while the AMD Radeon RX Vega 11's bandwidth is listed as "System Dependent."

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are built on fundamentally different architectures and process nodes. The AMD Radeon RX Vega 11 uses the GCN 5.0 architecture on a 12 nm process node, fabricated by GlobalFoundries. It is based on the Picasso chip and is classified as a Vega IGP. In contrast, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 uses the Kepler architecture on a much older 28 nm process node, fabricated by TSMC, and is based on the GK104 chip. This process difference is significant: the 12 nm node allows for a higher transistor density of 23.5M per mm², compared to the GTX 680's 12.0M per mm².

The AMD chip contains 4,940 million transistors on a die size of 210 mm², while the NVIDIA chip contains 3,540 million transistors on a larger die of 294 mm². Despite having fewer transistors, the GTX 680's larger die is due to the less efficient 28 nm process. The AMD part integrates its graphics into a larger system-on-chip, while the GTX 680 is a standalone graphics processor. The Vega 11's memory is system-shared, meaning it uses the system RAM, whereas the GTX 680 has dedicated GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus.

In terms of compute units, the Vega 11 has 704 shading units, 44 texture mapping units, and 8 ROPs. The GTX 680 has 1,536 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. This represents a substantial difference in raw processing capacity. The AMD part also supports a 2:1 FP16 ratio, offering 3.942 TFLOPS of half-precision compute, while the GTX 680 has no listed FP16 capability. The AMD GPU supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while the GTX 680 supports DirectX 12 (11_0), indicating a newer feature level on the AMD side.

Specification Differences

The most obvious specification difference is the memory subsystem. The AMD Radeon RX Vega 11 uses system-shared memory with a system-dependent bandwidth, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 has 2 GB of dedicated GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus, providing 192.3 GB/s of bandwidth. This is a critical distinction for performance, as the GTX 680 does not have to compete with the CPU for memory access.

Clock speeds also differ significantly. The AMD part has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 1,400 MHz. The GTX 680 has a base clock of 1,006 MHz and a boost clock of 1,058 MHz. While the AMD's boost clock is higher, the GTX 680's base clock is much higher, indicating it maintains a more consistent performance level. The memory clock on the GTX 680 is 1,502 MHz (6 Gbps effective), while the Vega 11's memory clock is system-shared.

Power consumption is another major differentiator. The AMD Radeon RX Vega 11 has a TDP of 15 W, making it an integrated graphics processor with no power connectors. The GTX 680 has a TDP of 195 W and requires two 6-pin power connectors, with a suggested PSU of 450 W. The form factor also differs: the Vega 11 is an IGP with motherboard-dependent display outputs, while the GTX 680 is a dual-slot card measuring 256 mm in length, with outputs including 2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, and 1x DisplayPort 1.2.

Finally, the launch MSRP of the GTX 680 was 499 USD, while the Vega 11 has no launch MSRP listed. The GTX 680 also has a higher FP32 performance at 3.250 TFLOPS, compared to the Vega 11's 1.971 TFLOPS. The GTX 680's pixel rate is 33.86 GPixel/s and texture rate is 135.4 GTexel/s, both far exceeding the Vega 11's 11.20 GPixel/s and 61.60 GTexel/s.