GPUBoss Review Our evaluation of 960M vs 680M among Laptop GPUs over 35W TDP

Gaming

Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Bioshock Infinite and 21 more

Graphics

T-Rex, Manhattan, Sky Diver Factor and Fire Strike Factor

Computing

Face Detection, Ocean Surface Simulation and 3 more

Performance per Watt

Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Bioshock Infinite and 31 more

Value

Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Bioshock Infinite and 31 more

Noise and Power

TDP, Idle Power Consumption, Load Power Consumption and 2 more

No winner declared

Too close to call

Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with GPUBoss?

Thanks for adding your opinion. Follow us on Facebook to stay up to date with the latest news!
VS

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of GeForce GTX 960M

Reasons to consider the
Nvidia GeForce GTX 960M

Report a correction
Significantly higher clock speed 1,097 MHz vs 719 MHz Around 55% higher clock speed
Higher effective memory clock speed 5,012 MHz vs 3,600 MHz Around 40% higher effective memory clock speed
Much higher turbo clock speed 1,176 MHz vs 719 MHz Around 65% higher turbo clock speed
Significantly higher memory clock speed 1,253 MHz vs 900 MHz Around 40% higher memory clock speed
Better bitcoin mining score 174.89 mHash/s vs 99.75 mHash/s More than 75% better bitcoin mining score
Lower TDP 75W vs 100W 25% lower TDP
Front view of GeForce GTX 680M

Reasons to consider the
Nvidia GeForce GTX 680M

Report a correction
Much higher dead space 3 framerate 111.1 fps vs 92.8 fps Around 20% higher dead space 3 framerate
More memory 4,096 MB vs 2,048 MB 2x more memory
Better PassMark score 3,377 vs 2,043 More than 65% better PassMark score
Much higher diablo III framerate 157.25 fps vs 121.3 fps Around 30% higher diablo III framerate
Significantly more texture mapping units 112 vs 40 72 more texture mapping units
Significantly better T-Rex score 3,353.52 vs 1,927.99 Around 75% better T-Rex score
Higher memory bandwidth 115.2 GB/s vs 80.2 GB/s Around 45% higher memory bandwidth
Higher texture rate 80.5 GTexel/s vs 43.9 GTexel/s Around 85% higher texture rate
More shading units 1,344 vs 640 704 more shading units
Better floating-point performance 1,932.7 GFLOPS vs 1,404.2 GFLOPS Around 40% better floating-point performance
More render output processors 32 vs 16 Twice as many render output processors
Significantly wider memory bus 256 bit vs 128 bit 2x wider memory bus

Benchmarks Real world tests of GeForce GTX 960M vs 680M

Bitcoin mining Data courtesy CompuBench

GeForce GTX 960M
174.89 mHash/s
GeForce GTX 680M
99.75 mHash/s

Face detection Data courtesy CompuBench

GeForce GTX 960M
53.96 mPixels/s
GeForce GTX 680M
28.08 mPixels/s

T-Rex (GFXBench 3.0) Data courtesy CompuBench

Manhattan (GFXBench 3.0) Data courtesy CompuBench

Fire Strike Factor Data courtesy FutureMark

Sky Diver Factor Data courtesy FutureMark

Battlefield 4

Comments

comments powered by Disqus