GeForce GTX 285M vs FirePro W5130M

Place in the ranking	710	940
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	no data	1.53
Architecture	GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)	Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code name	Tropo	G92
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Laptop
Release date	2 October 2015 (9 years ago)	1 February 2010 (14 years ago)

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	512	128
Core clock speed	900 MHz	600 MHz
Boost clock speed	925 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	1,500 million	754 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	no data	75 Watt
Texture fill rate	29.60	38.40
Floating-point processing power	0.9472 TFLOPS	0.384 TFLOPS
Gigaflops	no data	576
ROPs	16	16
TMUs	32	64

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Laptop size	medium sized	large
Bus support	no data	PCI-E 2.0
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	MXM-B (3.0)
SLI options	-	2-way
MXM Type	no data	MXM 3.0 Type-B

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory type	GDDR5	GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	1 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	1000 MHz	Up to 1020 MHz
Memory bandwidth	64 GB/s	61 GB/s
Shared memory	-	-

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors	No outputs	Single Link DVIVGALVDSHDMIDual Link DVIDisplayPort
Eyefinity	+	-
HDMI	-	+
Maximum VGA resolution	no data	2048x1536
Audio input for HDMI	no data	S/PDIF

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

AppAcceleration	+	-
Power management	no data	8.0

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX	12 (11_1)	11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model	5.1	4.0
OpenGL	4.6	2.1
OpenCL	1.2	1.1
Vulkan	1.2.131	N/A
CUDA	-	+

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

W5130M 3.65
+121%

GTX 285M 1.65

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

W5130M 1409
+122%

GTX 285M 636

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

900p	45−50 +114%	21 −114%
Full HD	23 −26.1%	29 +26.1%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

7−8
+75%

4−5

−75%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	10−12 +83.3%	6−7 −83.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	2−3	0−1
Battlefield 5	8−9 +167%	3−4 −167%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	8−9 +60%	5−6 −60%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 +75%	4−5 −75%
Far Cry 5	7−8 +250%	2−3 −250%
Far Cry New Dawn	10−11 +150%	4−5 −150%
Forza Horizon 4	21−24 +320%	5−6 −320%
Hitman 3	9−10 +50%	6−7 −50%
Horizon Zero Dawn	24−27 +62.5%	16−18 −62.5%
Metro Exodus	6−7 +200%	2−3 −200%
Red Dead Redemption 2	9−10 +200%	3−4 −200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	14−16 +55.6%	9−10 −55.6%
Watch Dogs: Legion	40−45 +20.6%	30−35 −20.6%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	10−12 +83.3%	6−7 −83.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	2−3	0−1
Battlefield 5	8−9 +167%	3−4 −167%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	8−9 +60%	5−6 −60%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 +75%	4−5 −75%
Far Cry 5	7−8 +250%	2−3 −250%
Far Cry New Dawn	10−11 +150%	4−5 −150%
Forza Horizon 4	21−24 +320%	5−6 −320%
Hitman 3	9−10 +50%	6−7 −50%
Horizon Zero Dawn	24−27 +62.5%	16−18 −62.5%
Metro Exodus	6−7 +200%	2−3 −200%
Red Dead Redemption 2	9−10 +200%	3−4 −200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	14−16 +55.6%	9−10 −55.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	47 +292%	12−14 −292%
Watch Dogs: Legion	40−45 +20.6%	30−35 −20.6%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	10−12 +83.3%	6−7 −83.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	2−3	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	8−9 +60%	5−6 −60%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 +75%	4−5 −75%
Far Cry 5	7−8 +250%	2−3 −250%
Forza Horizon 4	21−24 +320%	5−6 −320%
Hitman 3	9−10 +50%	6−7 −50%
Horizon Zero Dawn	24−27 +62.5%	16−18 −62.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	14−16 +55.6%	9−10 −55.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 +25%	12−14 −25%
Watch Dogs: Legion	40−45 +20.6%	30−35 −20.6%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

9−10
+200%

3−4

−200%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	6−7 +200%	2−3 −200%
Far Cry New Dawn	6−7 +200%	2−3 −200%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Far Cry 5	4−5 +100%	2−3 −100%
Forza Horizon 4	2−3	0−1
Hitman 3	8−9 +14.3%	7−8 −14.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn	9−10 +80%	5−6 −80%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Watch Dogs: Legion	21−24 +144%	9−10 −144%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

7−8
+75%

4−5

−75%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	2−3	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	1−2	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	0−1	0−1
Far Cry 5	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Forza Horizon 4	2−3	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	1−2	0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

4−5
+33.3%

3−4

−33.3%

This is how W5130M and GTX 285M compete in popular games:

W5130M is 114% faster in 900p
GTX 285M is 26% faster in 1080p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the W5130M is 320% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

W5130M is ahead in 50 tests (98%)
there's a draw in 1 test (2%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	3.65	1.65
Recency	2 October 2015	1 February 2010
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	1 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	65 nm

W5130M has a 121.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 132.1% more advanced lithography process.

The FirePro W5130M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 285M in performance tests.

Be aware that FirePro W5130M is a mobile workstation card while GeForce GTX 285M is a mobile workstation one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.