NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 vs NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 and the NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile represent two distinct eras of GPU design, separated by nearly a decade of architectural evolution. The GTX 680, a desktop flagship from the Kepler generation, relies on raw shader throughput and a wide memory bus, while the RTX A2000 Mobile is a modern Ampere-based laptop part that leverages efficiency and dedicated compute cores. The benchmark data shows a clear generational shift, with the mobile RTX A2000 delivering dramatically higher compute scores despite its lower power envelope.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark results are decisively one-sided. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the RTX A2000 Mobile scores 56,518, which is a massive 234% improvement over the GTX 680’s score of 16,906. The delta percentage of -70.1% reflects how far behind the older card is in this compute-oriented workload. This is not a marginal gain; it is a complete overhaul of compute capability, driven by the newer architecture’s ability to handle parallel workloads far more efficiently.

The Geekbench Vulkan test tells a similar story. The RTX A2000 Mobile posts a score of 53,146, while the GTX 680 manages 17,646. This represents a 201% advantage for the newer mobile chip, with a delta of -66.8% against the older card. Vulkan is a low-level API that benefits from modern hardware features, and the data indicates the Ampere architecture’s superior scheduling and execution resources are fully utilized here. The GTX 680, despite its age, still performs respectably in absolute terms, but it is clearly outclassed in every measurable way.

Across the two shared benchmarks, the RTX A2000 Mobile wins both, giving it a clean 2-0 record. The average benchmark score across all tests further illustrates the gap: the GTX 680 averages 14,150, while the RTX A2000 Mobile averages 13,821. Despite the RTX A2000 Mobile’s wins in the head-to-head tests, its overall average is slightly lower because its benchmark suite includes more diverse tests, such as Passmark DirectX and compute workloads, where its scores vary widely. For instance, the RTX A2000 Mobile scores 9,611 in Passmark G3D but only 57 in Passmark DirectX 10, indicating that its performance is highly workload-dependent.

The GTX 680’s own nearest rivals show it is closely matched with the NVIDIA Tesla K10, which sits just 0.9% behind, and the GeForce GTX 1070 Ti, which is 0.9% ahead. This places the GTX 680 in a performance tier that, while respectable, is firmly anchored in the mid-range of its era. The RTX A2000 Mobile, by contrast, sits within 0.1% of the AMD Radeon 660M and 0.6% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT, a flagship desktop card, indicating that its compute capabilities are surprisingly competitive despite its mobile form factor.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 has a higher average benchmark score of 14,150, compared to the RTX A2000 Mobile’s 13,821. However, the RTX A2000 Mobile wins decisively in the two head-to-head Geekbench tests.

Q: What is the performance difference in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The RTX A2000 Mobile scores 56,518, which is 234% higher than the GTX 680’s 16,906. The delta percentage shows the GTX 680 is 70.1% behind the newer card.

Q: How do the two cards compare in terms of memory bandwidth?

A: They are nearly identical. The GTX 680 has a bandwidth of 192.3 GB/s, while the RTX A2000 Mobile has 192.0 GB/s, a difference of just 0.3 GB/s.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The RTX A2000 Mobile has 2,560 shading units, which is 1,024 more than the GTX 680’s 1,536 shading units.

Q: What are the DirectX API capabilities of each card?

A: The GTX 680 supports DirectX 12 (11_0), while the RTX A2000 Mobile supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). The newer card also supports hardware ray tracing and tensor cores, which the GTX 680 lacks.

Q: Which card has a higher pixel rate?

A: The RTX A2000 Mobile has a pixel rate of 80.98 GPixel/s, which is more than double the GTX 680’s 33.86 GPixel/s.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two GPUs is stark. The GTX 680 is built on the Kepler architecture using a 28 nm process node at TSMC, with a die size of 294 mm² and 3,540 million transistors. This results in a transistor density of 12.0M per mm². The RTX A2000 Mobile is based on the Ampere architecture, fabricated on Samsung’s 8 nm node, with a smaller die of 200 mm² but a much higher transistor count of 8,700 million, yielding a density of 43.5M per mm². This density increase is a direct result of the more advanced manufacturing process.

The GTX 680 relies on a classic setup of 1,536 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 32 raster output units. It has no dedicated hardware for ray tracing or tensor operations, as those features did not exist in 2012. The RTX A2000 Mobile, in contrast, packs 2,560 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 48 ROPs, and adds 20 RT cores and 80 tensor cores. These extra units enable hardware-accelerated ray tracing and AI-driven workloads, which are completely absent from the older card’s feature set.

Memory configurations also diverge significantly. The GTX 680 uses 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus, while the RTX A2000 Mobile uses 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus. Despite the narrower bus, the newer memory type delivers nearly identical bandwidth (192.0 GB/s vs 192.3 GB/s), showcasing the efficiency gains of GDDR6. The RTX A2000 Mobile also supports PCIe 4.0 x16, doubling the bandwidth of the GTX 680’s PCIe 3.0 x16 interface, and features a much higher boost clock of 1,687 MHz compared to 1,058 MHz.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the RTX A2000 Mobile is the superior compute performer, dominating the Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan tests with margins exceeding 200%. For any workload that leverages modern APIs, parallel compute, or ray tracing, the RTX A2000 Mobile is the clear choice. Its 8.637 TFLOPS of FP32 performance is more than double the GTX 680’s 3.250 TFLOPS, and its 80 tensor cores provide additional acceleration for AI tasks that the GTX 680 cannot handle at all.

However, the GTX 680 is not without merit. Its average benchmark score is slightly higher, and it matches the RTX A2000 Mobile in memory bandwidth despite using older technology. For legacy applications that rely on older DirectX versions or specific OpenGL features, the GTX 680’s 256-bit bus and 128 TMUs may offer a more balanced profile. Its 2 GB of VRAM is limiting, but for 1080p gaming from its era, it remains a functional part.

The RTX A2000 Mobile’s 95 W TDP is less than half the GTX 680’s 195 W, making it far more efficient per watt. The newer card also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4, ensuring compatibility with modern software, while the GTX 680 is capped at DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.2.175. For a user building a system today, the RTX A2000 Mobile is the only sensible option, provided its mobile form factor is acceptable. The GTX 680 is a historical artifact, best suited for retro builds or testing older software.

Specification Differences

The following table highlights the key specification differences between the two GPUs, focusing only on fields where they diverge:

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 | NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile |

|---|---|---|

| Architecture | Kepler | Ampere |

| Generation | GeForce 600 | Ampere-MW (Ax000) |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 8 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Samsung |

| Transistors | 3,540 million | 8,700 million |

| Die Size | 294 mm² | 200 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 12.0M / mm² | 43.5M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1006 MHz | 1215 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1058 MHz | 1687 MHz |

| Memory Size | 2 GB | 4 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus Width | 256 bit | 128 bit |

| Shading Units | 1536 | 2560 |

| TMUs | 128 | 80 |

| ROPs | 32 | 48 |

| RT Cores | None | 20 |

| Tensor Cores | None | 80 |

| Pixel Rate | 33.86 GPixel/s | 80.98 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 135.4 GTexel/s | 135.0 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 3.250 TFLOPS | 8.637 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | None | 8.637 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 195 W | 95 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | IGP |

| Power Connectors | 2x 6-pin | None |

| Suggested PSU | 450 W | None |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, 1x DisplayPort 1.2 | Portable Device Dependent |

| DirectX Support | 12 (11_0) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |

| Vulkan Support | 1.2.175 | 1.4 |

| Release Date | 2012-03-21 | 2021-04-11 |

| Dimensions | 256 mm x 111 mm x 38 mm | No data |