GeForce GTX 680M KY_Bullet Edition vs GRID K520

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.

GeForce GTX 680M KY_Bullet Edition vs GRID K520 FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with Ryzen 7 9800X3D to isolate GPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

GeForce GTX 680M KY_Bullet Edition vs GRID K520: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each GPU makes more sense in practice: raw FPS, VRAM, features, power draw, pricing, and long-term headroom.

GeForce GTX 680M KY_Bullet Edition

2013

Why buy it

✅Draws 122W instead of 225W, a 103W reduction.
✅Measures 105mm instead of 267mm, a 162mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.

Trade-offs

❌2013 hardware with 2 GB of VRAM is already well past its comfortable zone for modern gaming, so it is hard to recommend now.
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0 vs 1.0 G3D/$ (Unknown MSRP vs $3,599 MSRP).

GRID K520

2013

Why buy it

✅Delivers 100+% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 1.0 vs 0 G3D/$ ($3,599 MSRP vs Unknown MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌2013 hardware with 2 GB of VRAM is already well past its comfortable zone for modern gaming, so it is hard to recommend now.
❌84.4% higher power demand at 225W vs 122W.
❌154.3% longer card at 267mm vs 105mm.

Quick Answers

Which GPU is faster for gaming right now?

GeForce GTX 680M KY_Bullet Edition is the faster gaming card right now based on the synthetic data we have. It leads by 1.5% in PassMark G3D (3,569 vs 3,516), which is the best performance signal available in this matchup.

Which GPU is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond?

GeForce GTX 680M KY_Bullet Edition is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond because it comes out ahead on the available hardware-headroom signals for this matchup.

Which GPU is the better buy today?

GRID K520 makes the most sense today based on the pricing and value data we have for this matchup. If you are mainly targeting 1080p and some 1440p, GRID K520 is the easier value choice. If you care more about 1080p and some 1440p headroom, GeForce GTX 680M KY_Bullet Edition has the stronger long-term case.

GeForce GTX 680M KY_Bullet Edition vs GRID K520 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

GeForce GTX 680M KY_Bullet Edition

The GeForce GTX 680M KY_Bullet Edition is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in November 8 2013. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock ranges from 771 MHz to 797 MHz. It has 1536 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 122W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,569 points.

GRID K520

The GRID K520 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in July 23 2013. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock speed is 745 MHz. It has 1536 ×2 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 225W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,516 points. Launch price was $3,599.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The GeForce GTX 680M KY_Bullet Edition scores 3,569 and the GRID K520 reaches 3,516 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.5% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 680M KY_Bullet Edition is built on Kepler while the GRID K520 uses Kepler, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 1,536 (GeForce GTX 680M KY_Bullet Edition) vs 1,536 (GRID K520). Raw compute: 2.448 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 680M KY_Bullet Edition) vs 2.289 TFLOPS ×2 (GRID K520).

Feature	GeForce GTX 680M KY_Bullet Edition	GRID K520
G3D Mark Score	3,569+2%	3,516
Architecture	Kepler	Kepler
Process Node	28 nm	28 nm
Shading Units	1536	1536 ×2
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.448 TFLOPS+7%	2.289 TFLOPS ×2
ROPs	32	32 ×2
TMUs	128	128 ×2
L1 Cache	128 KB	128 KB
L2 Cache	512 KB	512 KB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

The GeForce GTX 680M KY_Bullet Edition gets NVIDIA DLSS, which still tends to look cleaner in motion. The GRID K520 leans on FSR, which is flexible and widely supported, but usually a bit rougher at the same settings.

Feature	GeForce GTX 680M KY_Bullet Edition	GRID K520
Upscaling Tech	Upscaling support	Upscaling support
Frame Generation	Not Supported	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	NVIDIA Reflex	Standard

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

Both cards ship with 2 GB of GDDR5. Memory bus width is 256-bit on the GeForce GTX 680M KY_Bullet Edition and 64-bit on the GRID K520.

Feature	GeForce GTX 680M KY_Bullet Edition	GRID K520
VRAM Capacity	2 GB	2 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Bus Width	256-bit+300%	64-bit
L2 Cache	512 KB	512 KB

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (11_0) (GeForce GTX 680M KY_Bullet Edition) vs 12 (11_0) (GRID K520). Vulkan: 1.2 vs 1.2. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 0.

Feature	GeForce GTX 680M KY_Bullet Edition	GRID K520
DirectX	12 (11_0)	12 (11_0)
Vulkan	1.2	1.2
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
Max Displays	4	0

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC (GeForce GTX 680M KY_Bullet Edition) vs NVENC 1 (GRID K520). Decoder: PureVideo HD (VP5) vs NVDEC 1. Supported codecs: H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 (GeForce GTX 680M KY_Bullet Edition) vs H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 (GRID K520).

Feature	GeForce GTX 680M KY_Bullet Edition	GRID K520
Encoder	NVENC	NVENC 1
Decoder	PureVideo HD (VP5)	NVDEC 1
Codecs	H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1	H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 680M KY_Bullet Edition draws 122W versus the GRID K520's 225W — a 59.4% difference. The GeForce GTX 680M KY_Bullet Edition is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce GTX 680M KY_Bullet Edition) vs 350W (GRID K520). Power connectors: 1x 6-pin vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 105mm vs 267mm, occupying 0 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 75°C vs 75°C.

Feature	GeForce GTX 680M KY_Bullet Edition	GRID K520
TDP	122W-46%	225W
Recommended PSU	350W	350W
Power Connector	1x 6-pin	PCIe-powered
Length	105mm	267mm
Height	82mm	111mm
Slots	0-100%	2
Temp (Load)	75°C	75°C
Perf/Watt	29.3+88%	15.6