NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti SUPER Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M is a Kepler-based mobile graphics processor launched in 2012, built on a 28 nm process at TSMC with 3,540 million transistors on a 294 mm² die. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti SUPER is a Blackwell 2.0 desktop GPU from the GeForce 50-series, released in late 2025, fabricated on a 5 nm node with 45,600 million transistors across a 378 mm² die. These two parts sit at opposite ends of NVIDIA’s product timeline, separated by more than a decade of architectural evolution. The database shows the GTX 680M achieving an average benchmark score of 7,023, while the RTX 5070 Ti SUPER records 6,270 in its single recorded test. However, these averages come from different test suites, so direct comparison requires careful reading of the underlying metrics. The GTX 680M reaches the 39th percentile among all GPUs, while the RTX 5070 Ti SUPER sits at the 36th percentile, indicating both parts occupy similar relative positions in their respective performance distributions. The GTX 680M is marked end-of-life, while the RTX 5070 Ti SUPER remains active in production. This analysis draws exclusively from the recorded data in the database, covering architecture, benchmark outcomes, and use-case implications.

The Verdict

The data paints a clear picture of two GPUs designed for entirely different contexts. The GTX 680M, with its 2.038 TFLOPS of FP32 compute and 115.2 GB/s of memory bandwidth, is a legacy mobile part intended for gaming laptops of its era. Its average benchmark score of 7,023 places it within 1.1% of the GeForce GTX 675M and 0.7% ahead of the AMD Radeon R5 M240, while trailing the NVIDIA T600 by 0.2% and the GTX 970 by 1.9%. The RTX 5070 Ti SUPER, by contrast, delivers 43.94 TFLOPS of FP32 compute and 896.0 GB/s of bandwidth, but its single recorded 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 6,269.5 matches exactly the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 at 6,270, with a 0.0% delta. The Quadro K620 scores 6,282 (0.2% ahead), the AMD FirePro W600 scores 6,223 (0.8% behind), and the AMD Radeon R7 M350 scores 6,327 (0.9% ahead). The verdict depends on the workload. For legacy DirectX 11-era gaming or OpenCL compute tasks, the GTX 680M shows competitive numbers against its immediate peers, with a Geekbench OpenCL score of 9,230 and a Metal score of 4,815. For modern DirectX 12 Ultimate workloads, ray tracing, or high-bandwidth memory access, the RTX 5070 Ti SUPER is the only viable choice, given its 70 RT cores, 280 tensor cores, and support for DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). The GTX 680M supports DirectX 12 (11_0), which lacks the feature set of modern titles. Users with legacy software that relies on Kepler-era optimizations should consider the GTX 680M, but anyone targeting current-generation games, AI inference, or high-resolution textures must select the RTX 5070 Ti SUPER. The percentile rankings, 39th for the GTX 680M and 36th for the RTX 5070 Ti SUPER, suggest both GPUs sit near similar relative performance tiers within their respective release windows, but the absolute capability gap is enormous.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two GPUs is stark. The GTX 680M uses the GK104 chip, part of the Kepler architecture, fabricated on TSMC’s 28 nm process. It contains 3,540 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 12.0 million per square millimeter. The RTX 5070 Ti SUPER employs the GB203 chip, built on the Blackwell 2.0 architecture, using a 5 nm process. Its 45,600 million transistors occupy a 378 mm² die, achieving a density of 120.6 million per square millimeter, a tenfold increase in integration. The Kepler part operates at a base clock of 719 MHz with a boost of 758 MHz, while the Blackwell GPU runs at 2,295 MHz base and 2,452 MHz boost. Memory configurations diverge completely: the GTX 680M has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, producing 115.2 GB/s of bandwidth at 3.6 Gbps effective. The RTX 5070 Ti SUPER offers 16 GB of GDDR7 on a 256-bit bus, with 896.0 GB/s of bandwidth at 28 Gbps effective, a 7.8x bandwidth advantage. Shader resources scale similarly: the GTX 680M packs 1,344 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The RTX 5070 Ti SUPER has 8,960 shading units, 280 TMUs, and 96 ROPs, representing 6.7x, 2.5x, and 3x increases respectively. The newer GPU also includes 70 RT cores and 280 tensor cores, features entirely absent from the Kepler design. Pixel and texture rates reflect these differences: the GTX 680M outputs 21.22 GPixel/s and 84.90 GTexel/s, while the RTX 5070 Ti SUPER reaches 235.4 GPixel/s and 686.6 GTexel/s. FP32 compute jumps from 2.038 TFLOPS to 43.94 TFLOPS, and the RTX 5070 Ti SUPER adds FP16 at 43.94 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, whereas the GTX 680M has no recorded FP16 capability. API support shows another generational leap: the GTX 680M offers DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175. The RTX 5070 Ti SUPER supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Power draw grows from 100 W on the GTX 680M to 350 W on the RTX 5070 Ti SUPER, and the physical format changes from an MXM-B (3.0) module with no power connectors to a dual-slot, 304 mm long card requiring a single 16-pin connector. Display outputs shift from portable-device-dependent to 1x HDMI 2.1b and 3x DisplayPort 2.1b. The GTX 680M’s production status is end-of-life, with GeForce 500M as predecessor and GeForce 700M as successor. The RTX 5070 Ti SUPER has no predecessor or successor listed and remains active.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records no direct head-to-head benchmark results between these two GPUs, and the win tally shows zero for each. Instead, each part has its own benchmark entries, which must be examined separately. The GTX 680M delivers a Geekbench Metal score of 4,815 and a Geekbench OpenCL score of 9,230. Its average benchmark score of 7,023 places it in a tight cluster with its nearest rivals. The NVIDIA T600 averages 7,035, a 0.2% edge over the GTX 680M. The AMD Radeon R5 M240 scores 6,975, which is 0.7% lower. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M reaches 6,946, a 1.1% deficit. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 leads the group at 7,157, sitting 1.9% above the GTX 680M. These deltas indicate that within its peer group, the GTX 680M is essentially mid-pack, slightly outperforming two rivals while trailing two others by margins under 2%. The RTX 5070 Ti SUPER’s sole benchmark is 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 with a score of 6,269.5. Its average is 6,270. The nearest rivals show a different competitive landscape. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 matches exactly at 6,270, a 0.0% delta. The NVIDIA Quadro K620 posts 6,282, which is 0.2% higher. The AMD FirePro W600 scores 6,223, trailing by 0.8%. The AMD Radeon R7 M350 reaches 6,327, leading by 0.9%. The RTX 5070 Ti SUPER thus sits at the center of its comparison set, with rivals within a 1% band. The larger structural point is that the GTX 680M’s benchmark suite focuses on compute APIs like Metal and OpenCL, reflecting its era, while the RTX 5070 Ti SUPER’s test targets modern DX12 rasterization. The GTX 680M’s higher average score of 7,023 versus the RTX 5070 Ti SUPER’s 6,270 does not imply the older GPU is faster; it simply reflects different test methodologies and scoring scales. The GTX 680M’s OpenCL result of 9,230 exceeds its Metal result by 4,415 points, showing a substantial compute advantage in OpenCL workloads. The RTX 5070 Ti SUPER has no OpenCL or Metal scores recorded, so cross-API comparisons are impossible. The data supports a conclusion that each GPU performs within its expected generational tier, but absolute numeric comparison across different benchmark generations is not meaningful.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw FP32 compute performance?

A: The RTX 5070 Ti SUPER delivers 43.94 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the GTX 680M provides 2.038 TFLOPS. The newer GPU offers more than 21 times the FP32 throughput.

Q: How do their memory bandwidth figures compare?

A: The GTX 680M has 115.2 GB/s of bandwidth from 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus. The RTX 5070 Ti SUPER offers 896.0 GB/s from 16 GB of GDDR7 on the same 256-bit bus width.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same DirectX version?

A: No. The GTX 680M supports DirectX 12 (11_0), while the RTX 5070 Ti SUPER supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). The latter includes additional features for modern rendering techniques.

Q: What is the transistor density difference between the two chips?

A: The GTX 680M’s GK104 chip has 12.0 million transistors per square millimeter on a 28 nm process. The RTX 5070 Ti SUPER’s GB203 chip achieves 120.6 million per square millimeter on a 5 nm process.

Q: Are there any ray tracing or tensor cores in the GTX 680M?

A: No. The GTX 680M has no RT cores or tensor cores in the recorded data. The RTX 5070 Ti SUPER includes 70 RT cores and 280 tensor cores.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each GPU?

A: The GTX 680M records an average benchmark score of 7,023 based on its Metal and OpenCL results. The RTX 5070 Ti SUPER averages 6,270 from its single 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test.

Where Each One Wins

Legacy Compute Workloads: The GTX 680M wins for applications that rely on OpenCL or Metal APIs. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 9,230 is its strongest recorded result, and the Metal score of 4,815 provides a secondary data point. No such scores exist for the RTX 5070 Ti SUPER, so for compatibility with older compute frameworks, the GTX 680M has the only verified performance.

Modern DirectX 12 Gaming: The RTX 5070 Ti SUPER wins decisively for current-generation titles. Its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 6,269.5, combined with DirectX 12 Ultimate support, positions it for modern rasterization-heavy workloads. The GTX 680M’s DirectX 12 (11_0) support predates several feature levels required by newer games.

Ray Tracing and AI Features: The RTX 5070 Ti SUPER wins outright. It contains 70 RT cores for ray-traced rendering and 280 tensor cores for AI acceleration, features entirely absent from the GTX 680M. Any workload involving ray tracing, DLSS-style upscaling, or tensor-based inference must use the newer GPU.

Memory Capacity and Bandwidth: The RTX 5070 Ti SUPER wins with 16 GB of GDDR7 and 896.0 GB/s of bandwidth, versus 4 GB of GDDR5 and 115.2 GB/s on the GTX 680M. This advantage matters for high-resolution textures, large datasets, and memory-intensive compute tasks.

Form Factor Flexibility: The GTX 680M wins for portable devices. It is an MXM-B (3.0) module with a 100 W TDP and no power connectors, designed for laptop integration. The RTX 5070 Ti SUPER requires a dual-slot chassis, a 304 mm length, and a 16-pin power connector, limiting it to desktop systems.

Performance Density Relative to Peers: The GTX 680M holds a slight edge over two of its four nearest rivals (AMD Radeon R5 M240 by 0.7%, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M by 1.1%) while trailing the other two by margins under 2%. The RTX 5070 Ti SUPER matches its closest rival exactly and stays within 1% of all others. Neither GPU dominates its comparison group, but the GTX 680M shows a marginally wider spread of outcomes.

API Feature Set: The RTX 5070 Ti SUPER wins for forward-looking software. Vulkan 1.4 support and DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) exceed the GTX 680M’s Vulkan 1.2.175 and DirectX 12 (11_0) support. OpenGL 4.6 is identical on both, so legacy OpenGL applications see no difference.

Production Status: The GTX 680M is end-of-life, meaning no new supply is available. The RTX 5070 Ti SUPER is active in production, ensuring ongoing availability and driver support. For any new system build, the RTX 5070 Ti SUPER is the only practical choice. The GTX 680M retains relevance only for repair or legacy system maintenance.

Pixel and Texture Throughput: The RTX 5070 Ti SUPER wins with 235.4 GPixel/s and 686.6 GTexel/s, compared to 21.22 GPixel/s and 84.90 GTexel/s on the GTX 680M. These rates directly affect fill-rate-bound scenarios like high-resolution rendering and heavy texture filtering.

Power Efficiency: The GTX 680M draws 100 W versus 350 W for the RTX 5070 Ti SUPER. When power draw is the limiting factor, such as in battery-powered laptops, the GTX 680M is more suitable. The RTX 5070 Ti SUPER requires a robust desktop power supply and adequate cooling.