G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.

Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook

This comparison brings together gaming FPS, raw graphics performance, VRAM, feature set, power efficiency, pricing context, and long-term value so you can see which GPU actually makes more sense.

GeForce GTX 680

2012

Why buy it

✅36.2% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
✅Delivers 100+% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 11.2 vs 0 G3D/$ ($499 MSRP vs Unknown MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Very weak future-proofing: 2012-era hardware with 4 GB of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
❌1200% higher power demand at 195W vs 15W.

Radeon 760M

2024

Why buy it

✅More future proof: RDNA 3.0 (2022−2026) on 4nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
✅Draws 15W instead of 195W, a 180W reduction.
✅More future proof: RDNA 3.0 (2022−2026) on 4nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.

Trade-offs

❌Lower average FPS than GeForce GTX 680 across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0 vs 11.2 G3D/$ (Unknown MSRP vs $499 MSRP).

GeForce GTX 680

2012

Radeon 760M

2024

Why buy it

✅36.2% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
✅Delivers 100+% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 11.2 vs 0 G3D/$ ($499 MSRP vs Unknown MSRP).

Why buy it

✅More future proof: RDNA 3.0 (2022−2026) on 4nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
✅Draws 15W instead of 195W, a 180W reduction.
✅More future proof: RDNA 3.0 (2022−2026) on 4nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.

Trade-offs

❌Very weak future-proofing: 2012-era hardware with 4 GB of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
❌1200% higher power demand at 195W vs 15W.

Trade-offs

❌Lower average FPS than GeForce GTX 680 across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0 vs 11.2 G3D/$ (Unknown MSRP vs $499 MSRP).

Quick Answers

So, is GeForce GTX 680 better than Radeon 760M?

Yes. GeForce GTX 680 is clearly the better overall GPU here. GeForce GTX 680 averages 36.2% more FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data. You are also looking at 5,609 vs 5,449 in G3D Mark. On top of that, GeForce GTX 680 is a 2012 card with no meaningful modern upscaling stack, while Radeon 760M is a 2024 model from an older generation with FSR upscaling. So this is not really a tight same-tier comparison. It is more a modern card against an older, weaker alternative.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Radeon 760M is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer 2024 generation instead of 2012, better upscaling support with FSR Upscaling / FSR 4 (2025) instead of no meaningful modern upscaling stack, and a 4nm process instead of 28nm. That broader feature stack should age better as more games lean on modern upscaling and frame-generation support.

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper card?

GeForce GTX 680 is the smarter buy today, but it is not as lopsided as a simple winner label makes it sound. GeForce GTX 680 is priced in an unclear MSRP range at $499 MSRP versus an unclear MSRP, and you are getting 36.2% more estimated average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data and 2.9% higher G3D Mark. It also leads G3D-per-dollar by 100+%. Radeon 760M is the newer 2024 card, so it still has a real case if you care more about newer architecture, lower power draw (15W vs 195W), and future-proofing than about squeezing out the strongest gaming value today.

When does Radeon 760M make more sense than GeForce GTX 680?

Yes. Radeon 760M is still an excellent gaming GPU in 2026: it is still comfortable for 1080p and decent for 1440p, though 4K is more situational. It makes more sense if your priority is newer architecture, lower power draw (15W vs 195W), future-proofing, and staying closer to an unclear MSRP more than squeezing out the extra headroom of GeForce GTX 680. The trade-off is that GeForce GTX 680 currently gives you 2.9% higher G3D Mark and 36.2% more estimated average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data. It also leads G3D-per-dollar by 100+%.

Games Benchmarks

Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 9800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.

Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.

GeForce GTX 680 Benchmark Check

Radeon 760M Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	GeForce GTX 680	Radeon 760M
1080p
low	78 FPS	46 FPS
medium	66 FPS	29 FPS
high	53 FPS	21 FPS
ultra	35 FPS	12 FPS
1440p
low	68 FPS	32 FPS
medium	60 FPS	19 FPS
high	42 FPS	11 FPS
ultra	27 FPS	6 FPS
4K
low	25 FPS	12 FPS
medium	23 FPS	8 FPS
high	15 FPS	5 FPS
ultra	13 FPS	3 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 680 Open Radeon 760M

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	GeForce GTX 680	Radeon 760M
1080p
low	116 FPS	87 FPS
medium	86 FPS	61 FPS
high	66 FPS	42 FPS
ultra	43 FPS	29 FPS
1440p
low	64 FPS	56 FPS
medium	44 FPS	36 FPS
high	32 FPS	28 FPS
ultra	23 FPS	20 FPS
4K
low	24 FPS	29 FPS
medium	17 FPS	21 FPS
high	13 FPS	16 FPS
ultra	9 FPS	11 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 680 Open Radeon 760M

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	GeForce GTX 680	Radeon 760M
1080p
low	252 FPS	245 FPS
medium	202 FPS	196 FPS
high	168 FPS	163 FPS
ultra	126 FPS	123 FPS
1440p
low	189 FPS	184 FPS
medium	151 FPS	147 FPS
high	126 FPS	123 FPS
ultra	95 FPS	92 FPS
4K
low	126 FPS	123 FPS
medium	101 FPS	98 FPS
high	84 FPS	77 FPS
ultra	63 FPS	53 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 680 Open Radeon 760M

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	GeForce GTX 680	Radeon 760M
1080p
low	126 FPS	154 FPS
medium	101 FPS	120 FPS
high	86 FPS	103 FPS
ultra	73 FPS	81 FPS
1440p
low	97 FPS	109 FPS
medium	78 FPS	87 FPS
high	67 FPS	74 FPS
ultra	52 FPS	58 FPS
4K
low	57 FPS	65 FPS
medium	44 FPS	52 FPS
high	35 FPS	42 FPS
ultra	25 FPS	30 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 680 Open Radeon 760M

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 680 and Radeon 760M

GeForce GTX 680

The GeForce GTX 680 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 22 2012. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock ranges from 1006 MHz to 1058 MHz. It has 1536 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 195W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 5,609 points. Launch price was $499.

Radeon 760M

The Radeon 760M is manufactured by AMD. It was released in January 31 2024. It features the RDNA 3.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 800 MHz to 2599 MHz. It has 512 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 15W. Manufactured using 4 nm process technology. It features 8 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 5,449 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The GeForce GTX 680 scores 5,609 and the Radeon 760M reaches 5,449 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.9% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 680 is built on Kepler while the Radeon 760M uses RDNA 3.0, both on 28 nm vs 4 nm. Shader units: 1,536 (GeForce GTX 680) vs 512 (Radeon 760M). Raw compute: 3.25 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 680) vs 5.323 TFLOPS (Radeon 760M). Boost clocks: 1058 MHz vs 2599 MHz.

Feature	GeForce GTX 680	Radeon 760M
G3D Mark Score	5,609+3%	5,449
Architecture	Kepler	RDNA 3.0
Process Node	28 nm	4 nm
Shading Units	1536+200%	512
Compute (TFLOPS)	3.25 TFLOPS	5.323 TFLOPS+64%
Boost Clock	1058 MHz	2599 MHz+146%
ROPs	32+100%	16
TMUs	128+300%	32
L1 Cache	128 KB	128 KB
L2 Cache	0.5 MB	2 MB+300%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

The GeForce GTX 680 gives access to NVIDIA DLSS (Deep Learning Super Sampling), widely regarding as the superior upscaling method for image quality. The Radeon 760M relies on FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution), which is capable but generally slightly noisier than DLSS in motion.

Feature	GeForce GTX 680	Radeon 760M
Upscaling Tech	Upscaling support	FSR Upscaling / FSR 4
Frame Generation	Not Supported	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	NVIDIA Reflex	AMD Anti-Lag

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

Both cards feature 4 GB of video memory. Bus width: 256-bit vs System. L2 Cache: 0.5 MB (GeForce GTX 680) vs 2 MB (Radeon 760M) — the Radeon 760M has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GTX 680	Radeon 760M
VRAM Capacity	4 GB	4 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	Shared
Memory Bandwidth	192.2 GB/s	System
Bus Width	256-bit	System
L2 Cache	0.5 MB	2 MB+300%

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (FL 11_0) (GeForce GTX 680) vs 12 (12_2) (Radeon 760M). Vulkan: 1.1 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.

Feature	GeForce GTX 680	Radeon 760M
DirectX	12 (FL 11_0)	12 (12_2)
Vulkan	1.1	1.3+18%
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
Max Displays	4	4

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC 1st gen (GeForce GTX 680) vs VCN 4.0 (Radeon 760M). Decoder: PureVideo VP5 vs VCN 4.0. Supported codecs: H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 (GeForce GTX 680) vs H.264,H.265,AV1,VP9 (Radeon 760M).

Feature	GeForce GTX 680	Radeon 760M
Encoder	NVENC 1st gen	VCN 4.0
Decoder	PureVideo VP5	VCN 4.0
Codecs	H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2	H.264,H.265,AV1,VP9

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 680 draws 195W versus the Radeon 760M's 15W — a 171.4% difference. The Radeon 760M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 550W (GeForce GTX 680) vs 350W (Radeon 760M). Power connectors: 2x 6-pin vs None. Typical load temperature: 98°C vs 80°C.

Feature	GeForce GTX 680	Radeon 760M
TDP	195W	15W-92%
Recommended PSU	550W	350W-36%
Power Connector	2x 6-pin	None
Length	256mm	—
Height	111mm	—
Slots	2	0-100%
Temp (Load)	98°C	80°C-18%
Perf/Watt	28.8	363.3+1161%