NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains only one directly comparable benchmark result between these two parts: the GTX 680M has scores for Geekbench Metal and Geekbench OpenCL, while the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 has a score for 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12. Because the test suites do not overlap, a direct per-test comparison is not possible from the database. Instead, the comparison must rely on the aggregate benchmark score and the percentile positioning of each card.

The GTX 680M posts an average benchmark score of 7023, placing it in the 39th percentile of all GPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals in the database include the NVIDIA T600 at 7035 (0.2% ahead of the 680M), the AMD Radeon R5 M240 at 6975 (0.7% behind), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M at 6946 (1.1% behind). The GTX 970 sits at 7157, which is 1.9% above the 680M. These deltas are small, indicating that the 680M sits in a tightly packed performance cluster where a few percent separates adjacent entries.

The RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 records an average benchmark score of 6270, which places it in the 36th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti SUPER at 6270 (exactly 0% delta), the NVIDIA Quadro K620 at 6282 (0.2% ahead), the AMD FirePro W600 at 6223 (0.8% behind), and the AMD Radeon R7 M350 at 6327 (0.9% ahead). The 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 is therefore not an outlier in its neighborhood; it sits within 1% of all four nearest rivals.

The headline separation between the two cards is the average benchmark score gap: 7023 versus 6270, a difference of 753 points in favor of the GTX 680M. That represents roughly 12% higher aggregate score for the older mobile part. However, the benchmark types differ, and the database does not provide a shared workload across both cards. The 680M's score comes from compute-oriented tests (Metal and OpenCL), while the 4070 Ti SUPER AD102's score comes from a DX12 rasterization test. This makes a direct performance-per-test statement impossible. The data supports only the observation that, in the aggregate metric recorded, the GTX 680M scores higher despite being from an older generation.

Architecture Differences

The GTX 680M is built on the GK104 chip using the Kepler architecture, manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC. The RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 uses the AD102 chip with the Ada Lovelace architecture, also from TSMC but on a 5 nm node. Transistor counts differ enormously: the 680M has 3,540 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, while the 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 packs 76,300 million transistors on a 609 mm² die. Transistor density scales from 12.0 million per mm² on the 680M to 125.3 million per mm² on the newer part, a more than tenfold increase in density.

Clock behavior also diverges. The GTX 680M has a base clock of 719 MHz and a boost clock of 758 MHz. The RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 operates at a 2340 MHz base and 2610 MHz boost. Memory clocks are 900 MHz (3.6 Gbps effective) for the 680M versus 1313 MHz (21 Gbps effective) for the 4070 Ti SUPER AD102.

Memory configuration: the 680M has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256 bit bus with 115.2 GB/s bandwidth. The 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 has 16 GB of GDDR6X on the same 256 bit bus width but with 672.3 GB/s bandwidth, nearly six times higher. The newer card also carries hardware features the older part lacks. The RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 includes 66 ray tracing cores and 264 tensor cores, while the GTX 680M has no RT or tensor core counts recorded. Shading unit counts reflect the generational leap: 1344 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 32 ROPs on the 680M, versus 8448 shading units, 264 TMUs, and 96 ROPs on the 4070 Ti SUPER AD102.

Pixel and texture rates scale accordingly. The 680M achieves 21.22 GPixel/s and 84.90 GTexel/s, while the 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 reaches 250.6 GPixel/s and 689.0 GTexel/s. FP32 throughput is 2.038 TFLOPS for the 680M versus 44.10 TFLOPS for the 4070 Ti SUPER AD102, which also matches that figure in FP16 at a 1:1 ratio, a capability not listed for the 680M.

API support differs as well. The GTX 680M supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175. The RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Power and physical specs also separate them: the 680M is a 100 W MXM module with no power connectors and a portable-device-dependent display output, while the 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 is a triple-slot card drawing 285 W with a single 16-pin connector, a 600 W suggested PSU, a PCIe 4.0 x16 interface, and dimensions of 310 mm length, 140 mm height, and 61 mm width. The 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 also offers 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs.

Where Each One Wins

From the aggregate data, the GTX 680M wins on average benchmark score: 7023 versus 6270. It also holds a higher percentile ranking at 39 compared to 36 for the 4070 Ti SUPER AD102. In the compute-oriented workloads recorded (Geekbench Metal at 4815, Geekbench OpenCL at 9230), the 680M demonstrates solid OpenCL throughput, roughly double its Metal score. The 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 has no equal compute test in the database, so its standing in compute-style loads cannot be assessed from these records.

The RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 wins decisively on raw hardware capabilities. It has 16 GB of GDDR6X memory versus 4 GB of GDDR5, a huge bandwidth advantage (672.3 GB/s versus 115.2 GB/s), and far higher pixel, texture, and FP32 rates. It also supports ray tracing and tensor operations, which the 680M cannot perform. In any workload that uses those features, the newer card is the only one of the two that can execute them at all. The 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 also has a much higher boost clock (2610 MHz versus 758 MHz) and a larger transistor budget.

Where the 680M appears favorable is in the specific benchmark scores recorded. The average score difference suggests that, in the database's aggregate metric, the older card outperforms the newer one. This is likely a reflection of the differing test suites rather than the underlying hardware, but the data as recorded shows the 680M with the higher aggregate. The 680M also draws far less power (100 W versus 285 W) and uses a compact MXM form factor, which makes it suitable for portable systems where the triple-slot, 310 mm long 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 cannot physically fit.

The Verdict

The verdict depends entirely on which metric the database captures. In the aggregate benchmark score, the GTX 680M leads with 7023 against 6270 for the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102, and it also holds a higher percentile rank (39 versus 36). If the selection is based purely on the recorded average score, the GTX 680M is the database's pick.

However, the 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 is the only one of the two with ray tracing cores, tensor cores, and modern API support including DirectX 12 Ultimate. It has 4x the memory capacity, 5.8x the memory bandwidth, and more than 20x the FP32 throughput. Its pixel rate is over 11x higher and its texture rate over 8x higher. For any workload that exploits these capabilities, the 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 is categorically the stronger part. The data does not include a shared benchmark that exercises these features, so the hardware advantage cannot be turned into a measured score advantage within this database.

The practical reading: the GTX 680M wins the aggregate score race as recorded, but the 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 wins on every architectural capability that the database lists. The 680M is an end-of-life part from the GeForce 600M generation, released in 2012, while the 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 is also end-of-life but from the GeForce 40 generation, released in 2024. The 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 carries a launch MSRP of 799 USD, stated once here for reference. Users who require the newer feature set, higher bandwidth, or larger memory pool should choose the 4070 Ti SUPER AD102. Users who rely solely on the database's aggregate score and need a low-power mobile module might look at the 680M, but the absence of a shared test means that choice rests on a single metric rather than a broad benchmark comparison.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score in the database?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M has an average benchmark score of 7023, while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 has 6270.

Q: Does the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 support ray tracing?

A: Yes, it has 66 ray tracing cores and 264 tensor cores. The GTX 680M has no RT or tensor core counts recorded.

Q: How much memory does each card have?

A: The GTX 680M has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256 bit bus, while the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 has 16 GB of GDDR6X on a 256 bit bus.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The GTX 680M has 115.2 GB/s bandwidth, and the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 has 672.3 GB/s.

Q: Which card is more power-efficient according to the data?

A: The GTX 680M has a TDP of 100 W, while the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 has a TDP of 285 W. No efficiency ratio is provided in the database.

Q: Are there any benchmarks that both cards share?

A: No. The GTX 680M has Geekbench Metal and OpenCL scores, while the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 has a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score. The database lists no overlapping test results.