GPUBoss Review Our evaluation of 7750M vs 680 among all GPUs


Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Bioshock Infinite and 21 more


T-Rex, Manhattan, Cloud Gate Factor, Sky Diver Factor and 1 more


Face Detection, Ocean Surface Simulation and 3 more

Performance per Watt

Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Bioshock Infinite and 32 more

Noise and Power

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


Overall Score

Nvidia GeForce GTX 680 

GPUBoss recommends the Nvidia GeForce GTX 680  based on its benchmarks and compute performance.

See full details

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!

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Radeon HD 7750M

Reasons to consider the
AMD Radeon HD 7750M

Report a correction
Much lower TDP 28W vs 195W 7x lower TDP
Front view of GeForce GTX 680

Reasons to consider the
Nvidia GeForce GTX 680

Report a correction
Much better 3DMark06 score 26,525.5 vs 2,085 Around 12.8x better 3DMark06 score
Significantly better PassMark score 5,693 vs 1,191 More than 4.8x better PassMark score
Significantly higher clock speed 1,006 MHz vs 575 MHz Around 75% higher clock speed
Much better CLBenchmark raytrace score 176,118 vs 46,635 More than 3.8x better CLBenchmark raytrace score
Significantly better 3DMark vantage graphics score 33,025 vs 15,480 Around 2.2x better 3DMark vantage graphics score
Significantly higher memory bandwidth 192.3 GB/s vs 64 GB/s More than 3x higher memory bandwidth
Better 3DMark 11 graphics score 9,861 vs 2,085 Around 4.8x better 3DMark 11 graphics score
Higher effective memory clock speed 6,008 MHz vs 4,000 MHz More than 50% higher effective memory clock speed
Better floating-point performance 3,090.4 GFLOPS vs 588.8 GFLOPS Around 5.2x better floating-point performance
Significantly higher texture rate 128.8 GTexel/s vs 18.4 GTexel/s More than 7x higher texture rate
Much better fire strike factor score 60.74 vs 15.71 More than 3.8x better fire strike factor score
Significantly more texture mapping units 128 vs 32 96 more texture mapping units
Higher pixel rate 32.2 GPixel/s vs 9.2 GPixel/s More than 3.5x higher pixel rate
More shading units 1,536 vs 512 Three times as many shading units
More render output processors 32 vs 16 Twice as many render output processors
Significantly higher memory clock speed 1,502 MHz vs 1,000 MHz More than 50% higher memory clock speed
Better PassMark direct compute score 2,928 vs 725 More than 4x better PassMark direct compute score

Benchmarks Real world tests of Radeon HD 7750M vs GeForce GTX 680

PassMark Industry standard benchmark for overall graphics card performanceData courtesy Passmark

3DMark 11 Graphics Industry standard benchmark that tests DirectX 11 GPU performance

3DMark Vantage Graphics Industry standard benchmark that tests DirectX 10 GPU performance

Fire Strike Factor Data courtesy FutureMark

Sky Diver Factor Data courtesy FutureMark

Cloud Gate Factor Data courtesy FutureMark

PassMark Direct Compute Measures performance of general-purpose computing using Microsoft DirectCompute

CLBenchmark Raytrace Measures compute performance using OpenCL to do raytracing

Read more


comments powered by Disqus