NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M vs NVIDIA T600 Comparison

The NVIDIA T600 and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M are separated by nearly a decade of GPU architecture, and the benchmark data reflects that gap decisively. The T600 wins the only shared benchmark test by a massive margin, making it the clear choice for compute-oriented workloads, while the GTX 680M’s legacy lies in its raw shader count and texture throughput. The data shows a 202% advantage for the T600 in OpenCL performance, a result that overshadows the GTX 680M’s higher FP32 rating and larger memory bus.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The sole direct comparison available between these two GPUs is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and the result is not close. The NVIDIA T600 scores 27,875 points, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M manages only 9,230 points. This represents a delta of 202% in favor of the T600, meaning the newer card delivers more than three times the raw compute performance in this workload. The T600’s Turing architecture, with its 640 shading units and 1.709 TFLOPS FP32 throughput, clearly executes OpenCL tasks far more efficiently than the Kepler-based GTX 680M, which relies on 1,344 shading units but only achieves 2.038 TFLOPS FP32.

The GTX 680M does post a win in the aggregate benchmark averages, but it is marginal. The T600’s average benchmark score is 7,035, while the GTX 680M’s is 7,023, a difference of just 0.2% in favor of the T600. The nearest rival data confirms this near-parity: the GTX 680M is listed as a rival to the T600 with a deltaPct of 0.2, and the T600 appears as a rival to the GTX 680M with a deltaPct of -0.2. This means that, on average, the two GPUs are statistically indistinguishable in overall performance, despite the T600’s overwhelming OpenCL lead. The GTX 680M’s higher FP32 rating (2.038 TFLOPS vs. 1.709 TFLOPS) and superior texture rate (84.90 GTexel/s vs. 53.40 GTexel/s) contribute to its competitive average, but they do not translate into OpenCL wins.

Individual benchmark scores further illustrate the split. The T600 achieves 25,580 in Geekbench Vulkan, 6,479 in Passmark G3D, and 2,402 in Passmark GPU Compute. It also posts strong DirectX results, with 114 in Passmark DirectX 9 and 49 in Passmark DirectX 11. The GTX 680M has no Vulkan or DirectX scores recorded, only a Geekbench Metal result of 4,815 and the aforementioned OpenCL score. This lack of comparable data means the T600’s wins in Vulkan, DirectX, and compute are uncontested, while the GTX 680M’s Metal score exists in isolation, offering no basis for direct comparison.

The percentile rankings tell a similar story. Both GPUs sit at the 39th percentile among all GPUs, placing them in the same performance tier. However, the T600 achieves this with a fraction of the power draw (40 W vs. 100 W) and a much smaller die (200 mm² vs. 294 mm²), indicating that architectural efficiency is the T600’s primary advantage. The GTX 680M’s higher transistor density (12.0M / mm²) is offset by its older 28 nm process node, whereas the T600’s 12 nm node allows for 23.5M transistors per mm², nearly double the density.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher OpenCL benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA T600 scores 27,875 in Geekbench OpenCL, compared to the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M’s 9,230. This is a 202% difference in favor of the T600.

Q: Are these two GPUs comparable in overall performance?

A: Yes, according to average benchmark scores. The T600 has an average score of 7,035, while the GTX 680M has an average of 7,023, a difference of only 0.2% in favor of the T600.

Q: What is the memory configuration of each GPU?

A: Both GPUs have 4 GB of memory. The T600 uses GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 160.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the GTX 680M uses GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 115.2 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M has 1,344 shading units, while the NVIDIA T600 has 640. However, the T600’s higher clock speeds (1,335 MHz boost vs. 758 MHz boost) and newer architecture compensate for the lower count.

Q: Does the T600 support DirectX 12?

A: Yes, the T600 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while the GTX 680M only supports DirectX 12 (11_0). Both support OpenGL 4.6, but the T600 supports Vulkan 1.4 versus the GTX 680M’s Vulkan 1.2.175.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The T600 has a TDP of 40 W and requires a 200 W power supply. The GTX 680M has a TDP of 100 W, with no suggested power supply listed.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear verdict: the NVIDIA T600 is the superior GPU for anyone prioritizing compute performance, modern API support, and efficiency. Its 202% lead in OpenCL benchmarks is the single most significant metric in this comparison, dwarfing the GTX 680M’s modest advantages in FP32 throughput and texture rate. The T600’s 40 W TDP versus the GTX 680M’s 100 W TDP means it delivers more performance per watt, a critical factor in workstation environments. The GTX 680M’s higher shading unit count (1,344 vs. 640) and texture rate (84.90 GTexel/s vs. 53.40 GTexel/s) are notable, but they do not translate into wins in the available benchmark data. The T600’s support for DirectX 12 (12_1), Vulkan 1.4, and GDDR6 memory further cements its position as the more future-proof option. The GTX 680M, with its 2012 release date and Kepler architecture, is a legacy part that struggles to keep pace in modern workloads.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs diverge significantly across nearly every specification category. The T600 is built on a 12 nm process with 4,700 million transistors on a 200 mm² die, while the GTX 680M uses a 28 nm process with 3,540 million transistors on a 294 mm² die. Transistor density favors the T600 at 23.5M / mm² versus 12.0M / mm². Clock speeds show the T600 with a 735 MHz base and 1,335 MHz boost, while the GTX 680M runs at 719 MHz base and 758 MHz boost. Memory differs completely: the T600 uses 4 GB GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 160.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the GTX 680M uses 4 GB GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 115.2 GB/s bandwidth. The T600 has 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, while the GTX 680M has 1,344 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. Pixel rate favors the T600 at 42.72 GPixel/s versus 21.22 GPixel/s, but texture rate favors the GTX 680M at 84.90 GTexel/s versus 53.40 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is higher on the GTX 680M at 2.038 TFLOPS versus 1.709 TFLOPS, and the T600 has FP16 capability at 3.418 TFLOPS (2:1) while the GTX 680M has none. The T600 has a 40 W TDP, while the GTX 680M draws 100 W. The T600 uses a PCIe 3.0 x16 interface and features 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, while the GTX 680M uses an MXM-B (3.0) interface with portable-device-dependent outputs. The T600 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the GTX 680M supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is generational. The T600 is based on the TU117 chip using Turing architecture, released as part of the Quadro Turing (Tx000) generation. The GTX 680M is based on the GK104 chip using Kepler architecture, from the GeForce 600M generation. The T600 was released on April 11, 2021, while the GTX 680M launched on June 3, 2012, a difference of nearly nine years. The T600’s predecessor is Quadro Volta and its successor is Workstation Ampere, placing it in a modern workstation lineage. The GTX 680M’s predecessor is GeForce 500M and its successor is GeForce 700M, marking it as an early mobile gaming part. The T600 has no ray tracing or tensor cores, and neither does the GTX 680M. The T600’s 12 nm process node and 4,700 million transistors reflect a denser, more modern design, while the GTX 680M’s 28 nm node and 3,540 million transistors on a larger die show its age. The T600’s FP16 support at 3.418 TFLOPS (2:1) is absent on the GTX 680M, which has no FP16 capability listed. Both GPUs are end-of-life products, but the T600’s architecture is fundamentally newer and better suited to compute-heavy tasks.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA T600 is the clear winner in compute and modern API workloads. Its 202% OpenCL advantage over the GTX 680M is the decisive factor, making it the right choice for GPU-accelerated compute tasks, scientific simulations, and any workload that leverages OpenCL or Vulkan. The T600’s 25,580 Vulkan score, its DirectX 12 (12_1) support, and its 2,402 Passmark GPU Compute score all point to a GPU designed for professional and workstation use. Its 160.0 GB/s memory bandwidth, despite a narrower 128-bit bus, benefits from GDDR6 efficiency. The T600’s 40 W TDP makes it suitable for compact, low-power systems, and its 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs support multiple high-resolution displays.

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M wins in raw shader throughput and texture processing. Its 1,344 shading units and 112 TMUs give it a theoretical advantage in pixel-heavy and texture-bound workloads, as evidenced by its 84.90 GTexel/s texture rate versus the T600’s 53.40 GTexel/s. Its FP32 rating of 2.038 TFLOPS is 19% higher than the T600’s 1.709 TFLOPS, which may benefit older applications optimized for raw compute. The GTX 680M’s 256-bit memory bus, while slower in bandwidth (115.2 GB/s), provides higher memory parallelism that could aid in certain memory-access patterns. The GTX 680M’s 4,815 Geekbench Metal score shows some capability in Apple’s API, though no direct comparison exists. However, these advantages are theoretical and not reflected in the shared OpenCL test, where the T600 dominates. For modern workloads, the T600 wins outright; for legacy applications that favor raw shader counts and texture throughput, the GTX 680M retains a niche edge.