FirePro S9000 vs Qualcomm Adreno 680
In this comparison between FirePro S9000 and Qualcomm Adreno 680 you will find out which graphics card performs better in today's games. Bear in mind that third-party versions may have more efficient cooling and higher clock speeds. This will increase cards' performance, though not by much. In addition to raw power you should also take into account the dimensions. Thicker models simply will not fit into a small mini-ITX case. The resolution of your monitor also affects the choice, since 4K gameplay requires a more powerful GPU. And don't overspend on the graphics card. Other parts of your build may also need to be upgraded, save some money for the CPU or power supply. For some people FirePro S9000 will be the best choice, for others Qualcomm Adreno 680 will be their preference. Study the comparison tables below and make your choice.
FirePro S9000
Qualcomm Adreno 680 is a Laptop Graphics Card
Note: Qualcomm Adreno 680 is only used in laptop graphics. It has lower GPU clock speed compared to the desktop variant, which results in lower power consumption, but also 10-30% lower gaming performance. Check available laptop models with Qualcomm Adreno 680 here:
Main Specs
| FirePro S9000 | Qualcomm Adreno 680 | |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 350 Watt | |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 8-pin | |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | |
| Maximum RAM amount | 6 GB | |
| Display Connectors | 1x DisplayPort | |
| Check Price |
- FirePro S9000 is used in Desktops, and Qualcomm Adreno 680 - in Laptops.
- FirePro S9000 is manufactured by 28 nm process technology, and Qualcomm Adreno 680 - by 7 nm process technology.
Game benchmarks
| high / 1080p | 35−40 | 0−1 |
| ultra / 1080p | 21−24 | − |
| QHD / 1440p | 16−18 | 0−1 |
| 4K / 2160p | 10−11 | − |
| low / 720p | 60−65 | 1−2 |
| medium / 1080p | 40−45 | 0−1 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro S9000 in Assassin's Creed Odyssey is 6100% more, than Qualcomm Adreno 680. | ||
| high / 1080p | 55−60 | − |
| ultra / 1080p | 45−50 | − |
| QHD / 1440p | 35−40 | 0−1 |
| 4K / 2160p | 18−20 | − |
| low / 720p | 100−110 | 0−1 |
| medium / 1080p | 60−65 | − |
| low / 768p | 50−55 | 50−55 |
| high / 1080p | − | 45−50 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| FirePro S9000 and Qualcomm Adreno 680 have the same average FPS in Call of Duty: Warzone. | ||
| low / 768p | 250−260 | 60−65 |
| medium / 768p | 220−230 | 27−30 |
| ultra / 1080p | 180−190 | 7−8 |
| QHD / 1440p | 110−120 | − |
| 4K / 2160p | 70−75 | − |
| high / 768p | 210−220 | 16−18 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro S9000 in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive is 685% more, than Qualcomm Adreno 680. | ||
| low / 768p | 60−65 | 70−75 |
| ultra / 1080p | − | 0−1 |
| medium / 1080p | 55−60 | 45−50 |
| FirePro S9000 and Qualcomm Adreno 680 have the same average FPS in Cyberpunk 2077. | ||
| low / 768p | 120−130 | 45−50 |
| medium / 768p | 110−120 | 10−11 |
| ultra / 1080p | 100−110 | 0−1 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro S9000 in Dota 2 is 313% more, than Qualcomm Adreno 680. | ||
| high / 1080p | 45−50 | − |
| ultra / 1080p | 40−45 | − |
| QHD / 1440p | 27−30 | − |
| 4K / 2160p | 14−16 | − |
| low / 720p | 80−85 | 0−1 |
| medium / 1080p | 45−50 | − |
| high / 1080p | 60−65 | − |
| ultra / 1080p | 45−50 | − |
| QHD / 1440p | 27−30 | − |
| 4K / 2160p | 27−30 | − |
| low / 720p | 180−190 | 21−24 |
| medium / 1080p | 110−120 | 0−1 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro S9000 in Fortnite is 740% more, than Qualcomm Adreno 680. | ||
| high / 1080p | 60−65 | 0−1 |
| ultra / 1080p | 45−50 | − |
| QHD / 1440p | 30−35 | 0−1 |
| 4K / 2160p | 24−27 | − |
| low / 720p | 100−110 | 0−1 |
| medium / 1080p | 65−70 | 0−1 |
| low / 768p | 140−150 | 18−20 |
| medium / 768p | 120−130 | − |
| high / 1080p | 70−75 | 0−1 |
| ultra / 1080p | 30−35 | − |
| QHD / 1440p | 21−24 | 0−1 |
| medium / 720p | − | 12−14 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro S9000 in Grand Theft Auto V is 663% more, than Qualcomm Adreno 680. | ||
| high / 1080p | 24−27 | − |
| ultra / 1080p | 20−22 | − |
| QHD / 1440p | 16−18 | − |
| 4K / 2160p | 8−9 | − |
| low / 720p | 65−70 | 0−1 |
| medium / 1080p | 30−35 | − |
| low / 768p | 130−140 | 75−80 |
| high / 1080p | − | 27−30 |
| medium / 1080p | 120−130 | − |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro S9000 in Minecraft is 75% more, than Qualcomm Adreno 680. | ||
| ultra / 1080p | 14−16 | − |
| low / 720p | 100−110 | 8−9 |
| medium / 1080p | 18−20 | − |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro S9000 in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS is 1212% more, than Qualcomm Adreno 680. | ||
| high / 1080p | 24−27 | − |
| ultra / 1080p | 16−18 | − |
| QHD / 1440p | 10−11 | − |
| 4K / 2160p | 7−8 | − |
| low / 720p | 65−70 | 0−1 |
| medium / 1080p | 35−40 | − |
| low / 768p | 130−140 | 0−1 |
| medium / 768p | 85−90 | − |
| high / 1080p | 45−50 | − |
| ultra / 1080p | 24−27 | − |
| 4K / 2160p | 16−18 | − |
| low / 768p | 90−95 | 45−50 |
| medium / 768p | 60−65 | 14−16 |
| ultra / 1080p | 50−55 | 0−1 |
| high / 768p | 60−65 | 12−14 |
| The average gaming FPS of FirePro S9000 in World of Tanks is 188% more, than Qualcomm Adreno 680. | ||
Full Specs
| FirePro S9000 | Qualcomm Adreno 680 | |
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | |
| Code name | Tahiti | |
| Type | Workstation | Laptop |
| Release date | 24 August 2012 | 6 December 2018 |
| Pipelines | 1792 | |
| Core clock speed | 900 MHz | |
| Transistor count | 4,313 million | |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 7 nm |
| Texture fill rate | 100.8 | |
| Floating-point performance | 3,226 gflops | |
| Length | 267 mm | |
| Memory bus width | 384 Bit | |
| Memory clock speed | 5500 MHz | |
| Memory bandwidth | 264 GB/s | |
| Shared memory | + | |
| DirectX | 12 (11_1) | DirectX 12 |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | |
| Bus support | PCIe 3.0 | |
| Bitcoin / BTC (SHA256) | 92 Mh/s | |
| Form factor | full height / full length | |
| DisplayPort count | 1 | |
| Dual-link DVI support | + | |
| Check Price |