NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M represent two very different approaches to graphics processing: a desktop card designed for high-performance gaming and a mobile module for laptops. The data shows a clear generational and performance gulf between them, with the GTX 970 leading in all shared benchmarks. The GTX 680M, while an older mobile part, still holds relevance in its specific context, but the GTX 970 is the overwhelmingly stronger performer.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 has an average benchmark score of 7157, which is 1.9% higher than the GTX 680M's average score of 7023. This places the GTX 970 ahead of its rival in the aggregate data.

Q: How does the GTX 970 perform in the Geekbench Metal test compared to the GTX 680M?

A: The GTX 970 scores 13595 in Geekbench Metal, while the GTX 680M scores 4815. This results in a deltaPct of 182.3%, meaning the GTX 970 is 182.3% faster in this specific benchmark.

Q: What is the difference in their FP32 floating-point performance?

A: The GTX 970 delivers 3.920 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the GTX 680M delivers 2.038 TFLOPS. The GTX 970's figure is nearly double that of the mobile chip.

Q: Are both GPUs based on the same architecture?

A: No. The GTX 970 is based on the Maxwell 2.0 architecture with the GM204 chip, while the GTX 680M is based on the older Kepler architecture with the GK104 chip. Both are manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC.

Q: Do both cards support DirectX 12?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12, but at different feature levels. The GTX 970 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while the GTX 680M supports DirectX 12 (11_0), indicating a higher feature set on the newer card.

Q: Which GPU has a higher memory bandwidth?

A: The GTX 970 has a memory bandwidth of 224.4 GB/s, which is significantly higher than the GTX 680M's 115.2 GB/s. Both use 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 is the superior product for nearly any use case. It wins both head-to-head benchmarks with massive margins, and its architectural advantages translate to real-world performance gains. For anyone building a desktop system, the GTX 970 is the clear choice, offering more than double the compute performance in some tests.

The GTX 680M, however, serves a narrow but valid purpose. As an MXM module, it is designed for laptop upgrades or repairs. If you are constrained to a mobile platform that supports this specific module, it is a functional option, but the benchmark results show it is severely outclassed by the desktop card. The GTX 680M’s only advantage lies in its lower power consumption, with a TDP of 100 W compared to the GTX 970’s 148 W, and its slot width of MXM Module versus Dual-slot.

For a desktop user, the GTX 970 is the only logical pick from this pair. The performance gap is too large to ignore, and its higher power draw is a reasonable trade-off for the massive increase in speed. For a laptop user with a compatible MXM slot, the GTX 680M is a serviceable, low-power option, but it will not match the GTX 970's performance in any scenario.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head comparison is limited to two tests, and the GTX 970 wins both decisively. In the Geekbench Metal test, the GTX 970 scores 13595, while the GTX 680M scores 4815. This is a deltaPct of 182.3%, meaning the GTX 970 is nearly three times as fast. This test measures GPU compute performance under Apple's Metal API, and the result highlights the architectural efficiency of Maxwell 2.0 over Kepler.

The second test, Geekbench OpenCL, shows an even larger gap. The GTX 970 scores 29982, and the GTX 680M scores 9230. The deltaPct here is 224.8%, indicating that the GTX 970 is more than three times faster in OpenCL compute workloads. This is a significant margin that reflects the GTX 970's higher shader count and clock speeds.

In terms of raw compute metrics, the GTX 970 also leads. Its FP32 performance is 3.920 TFLOPS versus the GTX 680M's 2.038 TFLOPS, a difference of roughly 92%. The pixel rate is also drastically different, with the GTX 970 achieving 65.97 GPixel/s compared to the GTX 680M's 21.22 GPixel/s. Texture rate follows suit: 122.5 GTexel/s for the GTX 970 versus 84.90 GTexel/s for the GTX 680M. All data points to the GTX 970 being the dominant performer.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every core specification. The GTX 970 has a base clock of 1050 MHz and a boost clock of 1178 MHz, while the GTX 680M runs at a much lower 719 MHz base and 758 MHz boost. Memory clocks also differ: the GTX 970 uses 1753 MHz (7 Gbps effective) GDDR5, while the GTX 680M uses 900 MHz (3.6 Gbps effective) GDDR5.

The shading units are 1664 on the GTX 970 versus 1344 on the GTX 680M. Texture mapping units (TMUs) are 104 on the GTX 970 and 112 on the GTX 680M, a rare instance where the mobile card has more. Raster output units (ROPs) are 56 on the GTX 970 and only 32 on the GTX 680M. The transistor count is 5,200 million for the GTX 970 versus 3,540 million for the GTX 680M, with die sizes of 398 mm² and 294 mm² respectively. This results in a transistor density of 13.1M / mm² for the GTX 970 and 12.0M / mm² for the GTX 680M.

Power and physical specifications also diverge. The GTX 970 has a TDP of 148 W and requires 2x 6-pin power connectors, with a suggested PSU of 300 W. It is a dual-slot card measuring 267 mm in length. The GTX 680M is an MXM module with a TDP of 100 W and no power connectors, relying on the laptop's own power delivery. Its dimensions are not listed, as they are portable-device dependent. The bus interface is PCIe 3.0 x16 for the GTX 970 and MXM-B (3.0) for the GTX 680M. Display outputs are 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, and 3x DisplayPort 1.2 on the GTX 970, while the GTX 680M's outputs are portable device dependent.

Architecture Differences

The GTX 970 is built on the Maxwell 2.0 architecture, which is a significant evolution over the Kepler architecture used in the GTX 680M. Maxwell 2.0 introduced improvements in power efficiency and performance per clock, which is evident in the GTX 970's higher clock speeds and better benchmark scores despite a higher TDP. The GTX 970's chip is GM204, while the GTX 680M uses GK104.

Both are fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC, but the GTX 970 packs more transistors into a larger die: 5,200 million transistors on 398 mm² versus 3,540 million on 294 mm². The transistor density is slightly higher on the GTX 970 at 13.1M / mm² versus 12.0M / mm². In terms of API support, the GTX 970 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), a higher feature level than the GTX 680M's DirectX 12 (11_0). Vulkan support also differs, with the GTX 970 supporting version 1.4 and the GTX 680M supporting 1.2.175. Both support OpenGL 4.6.

The release dates show a two-year gap: the GTX 680M was released on 2012-06-03, and the GTX 970 on 2014-09-18. The GTX 970's predecessor is the GeForce 700 series, and its successor is GeForce 10. The GTX 680M's predecessor is GeForce 500M, and its successor is GeForce 700M. Both are end-of-life products.

Where Each One Wins

The GTX 970 wins in every benchmark where both have been tested. It is the clear victor in Geekbench Metal and Geekbench OpenCL, and its higher FP32, pixel rate, and texture rate figures make it the superior choice for gaming, compute workloads, and any GPU-accelerated task. Its high memory bandwidth of 224.4 GB/s also gives it an edge in bandwidth-sensitive applications. If you are building a desktop, the GTX 970 is the definitive winner.

The GTX 680M wins in the context of power efficiency and form factor. With a TDP of 100 W versus 148 W, it draws less power, making it suitable for laptops where thermal and power budgets are tight. Its MXM module form factor is its key advantage, as it is designed to fit into mobile systems. For a user with a laptop that has a compatible MXM-B slot, the GTX 680M is the only option in this comparison. It also has more TMUs (112 vs 104), which could theoretically help in certain texture-heavy tasks, but the GTX 970's other advantages nullify this in practice. The GTX 680M is a niche product for mobile upgrades, while the GTX 970 is a broadly capable desktop card.