NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M vs NVIDIA RTX A400 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data delivers a decisive result: the NVIDIA RTX A400 dominates the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M in the only directly comparable test recorded. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RTX A400 scores 22,844, while the GTX 675M manages 6,946. That translates to a 69.6% deficit for the older mobile GPU, meaning the RTX A400 delivers more than three times the compute throughput in this workload. This is not a marginal generational step; it is a categorical shift in raw processing capability.

The GTX 675M has no wins in the head-to-head comparison, with the RTX A400 taking the sole benchmark entry outright. The OpenCL gap is so wide that even the older card's nearest rivals offer context. The GTX 675M sits within 1.7% of the AMD FirePro M5100 and within 1.3% of the NVIDIA T600, yet the RTX A400's score places it in a completely different performance tier. The delta between the two cards, 69.6%, dwarfs any of the small percentage differences seen among the GTX 675M's closest competitors.

Looking at the RTX A400's additional benchmark results, the pattern of capability extends beyond OpenCL. Its Geekbench Vulkan score reaches 22,237, nearly matching its OpenCL number. In Passmark tests, the card records a G3D score of 5,983, a GPU compute score of 2,557, and 2D performance of 899. DirectX legacy tests show 87 in DirectX 9, 37 in DirectX 11, 32 in DirectX 10, and 27 in DirectX 12. While these tests do not have corresponding GTX 675M results in the database, they establish that the RTX A400's performance is consistent across multiple APIs and workload types.

The average benchmark score tells a similar story. The RTX A400 averages 6,078 across its recorded benchmarks, while the GTX 675M averages 6,946 from its single OpenCL result. Interestingly, the GTX 675M's average is actually higher than the RTX A400's average, but this is misleading. The RTX A400's average is dragged down by its low DirectX legacy scores (27 to 87 range), which are not representative of modern compute workloads. The OpenCL head-to-head remains the most relevant comparison, and there the RTX A400 is overwhelmingly ahead.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX A400 wins decisively in general-purpose compute and modern API workloads. Its OpenCL score of 22,844 versus the GTX 675M's 6,946 indicates a 3.3x advantage in compute-heavy applications such as rendering, simulation, and data processing. The Vulkan score of 22,237 further confirms strong performance in modern graphics APIs, and the DirectX 12 Ultimate support (12_2) means it is built for current and future workloads. The GTX 675M's DirectX 12 (11_0) support is a legacy feature set, capping its compatibility with modern titles and applications.

The GTX 675M does not win any recorded benchmark, but it is not without context. Its nearest rivals, the AMD Radeon R5 M240 at 6,975 and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M at 7,023, sit within 1.1% of its score. This places the GTX 675M in the lower-middle tier of mobile GPUs from its era. It remains competitive with other 2012-era mobile parts, but the RTX A400, released over a decade later, is simply in another class.

For legacy DirectX 9 workloads, the RTX A400's Passmark score of 87 shows it can handle older titles, though the GTX 675M has no equivalent recorded result. The RTX A400 also brings hardware ray tracing with 6 RT cores and AI acceleration with 24 Tensor Cores, features the GTX 675M lacks entirely. Any workload that leverages ray tracing or tensor operations is exclusively the RTX A400's domain.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the RTX A400 than the GTX 675M in OpenCL?

A: The RTX A400 scores 22,844 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the GTX 675M scores 6,946. This represents a 69.6% delta, making the RTX A400 approximately 3.3 times faster in this compute workload.

Q: Does the GTX 675M win any benchmark?

A: No. In the head-to-head comparison, the RTX A400 wins the only shared test (Geekbench OpenCL). The GTX 675M records zero wins, while the RTX A400 records one.

Q: What is the RTX A400's Vulkan performance?

A: The RTX A400 scores 22,237 in Geekbench Vulkan, nearly matching its OpenCL score of 22,844. This indicates strong cross-API compute capability.

Q: How does the GTX 675M compare to its own rivals?

A: The GTX 675M is within 1.7% of the AMD FirePro M5100 (6,830), within 1.3% of the NVIDIA T600 (7,035), within 1.1% of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M (7,023), and within 0.4% of the AMD Radeon R5 M240 (6,975).

Q: Does the RTX A400 support ray tracing?

A: Yes. The RTX A400 includes 6 RT cores and 24 Tensor Cores, and its DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) API support includes hardware ray tracing capabilities. The GTX 675M has no RT or Tensor cores.

Q: What is the RTX A400's DirectX 12 performance in Passmark?

A: The RTX A400 scores 27 in Passmark DirectX 12, which is lower than its DirectX 9 score of 87. This suggests the Passmark legacy tests may not fully reflect the card's modern API performance, as its OpenCL and Vulkan scores are substantially higher.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every specification category. The GTX 675M uses a 40 nm process node from TSMC, while the RTX A400 uses an 8 nm node from Samsung. Transistor counts reflect this: the GTX 675M packs 1,950 million transistors on a 332 mm² die, while the RTX A400 fits 8,700 million transistors on a 200 mm² die. Transistor density jumps from 5.9M per mm² to 43.5M per mm².

Memory configurations differ significantly. The GTX 675M has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, while the RTX A400 has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus. Both achieve identical bandwidth of 96.00 GB/s, but through very different means. Memory clocks also differ: the GTX 675M runs at 750 MHz (3 Gbps effective) versus the RTX A400's 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective).

Compute resources are substantially different. The GTX 675M has 384 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The RTX A400 has 768 shading units (double), but only 24 TMUs and 16 ROPs. The RTX A400 adds 6 RT cores and 24 Tensor Cores, which the GTX 675M lacks entirely. Pixel rate improves from 9.920 GPixel/s to 28.19 GPixel/s, and texture rate from 39.68 GTexel/s to 42.29 GTexel/s. FP32 performance jumps from 952.3 GFLOPS to 2.706 TFLOPS. The RTX A400 also supports FP16 at 2.706 TFLOPS (1:1), while the GTX 675M has no FP16 rating.

Power and physical specifications diverge sharply. The GTX 675M has a 100 W TDP and uses an MXM Module slot with MXM-B (3.0) interface. The RTX A400 has a 50 W TDP, is a single-slot card, uses PCIe 4.0 x8, and measures 163 mm by 69 mm. The GTX 675M has no power connectors and its display outputs are portable-device dependent; the RTX A400 has no power connectors but offers 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. The RTX A400 suggests a 250 W PSU.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide is generational. The GTX 675M is built on Fermi 2.0 with the GF114 chip, part of the GeForce 600M generation. It supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and has no Vulkan rating. The RTX A400 uses the Ampere architecture with the GA107 chip, from the Workstation Ampere (Ax000) generation. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

The RTX A400's Ampere architecture brings dedicated RT cores and Tensor cores, enabling hardware ray tracing and AI-accelerated workloads. The Fermi architecture in the GTX 675M predates these features by a decade. The RTX A400's FP16 throughput matches its FP32 at 2.706 TFLOPS, indicating a 1:1 ratio typical of modern architectures, whereas the GTX 675M has no FP16 capability listed.

The memory subsystem reflects different design philosophies. The GTX 675M uses a wide 256-bit bus with slower GDDR5, while the RTX A400 uses a narrow 64-bit bus with faster GDDR6. Both achieve the same 96.00 GB/s bandwidth, but the RTX A400 does so with half the bus width, demonstrating the efficiency gains of newer memory technology. The production status also differs: the GTX 675M is end-of-life, while the RTX A400 is active. The GTX 675M's release date is 2012-03-21, while the RTX A400 launched 2024-04-15, a gap of over twelve years.

The Verdict

The data points to a single conclusion: the NVIDIA RTX A400 is the superior card for any modern workload. Its OpenCL score of 22,844 versus the GTX 675M's 6,946 is a 69.6% advantage, and it adds Vulkan support, ray tracing, Tensor cores, and double the shading units. The GTX 675M, with its Fermi architecture and end-of-life status, is only competitive within its own 2012-era peer group, where it sits within 1.7% of cards like the AMD FirePro M5100.

Users who need current API support, hardware ray tracing, AI acceleration, or high compute throughput should choose the RTX A400. Its 4 GB of GDDR6 memory doubles the GTX 675M's 2 GB, and its 50 W TDP is half the older card's power draw, making it more efficient as well as faster. The RTX A400's Passmark scores, while modest in legacy DirectX tests, show strong G3D (5,983) and GPU compute (2,557) results that align with its modern architecture.

The GTX 675M is a product of its time. Its 39th percentile ranking among all GPUs and its narrow rivalry with cards like the NVIDIA T600 (within 1.3%) and AMD Radeon R5 M240 (within 0.4%) place it in a crowded mid-low tier. It has no modern API advantages, no RT or Tensor cores, and its 96.00 GB/s bandwidth, while matching the RTX A400, comes from a much less efficient memory design. For anyone choosing between these two today, the RTX A400 is the only rational pick based on the recorded data.