Arctic Sound-M vs GeForce GTX 285

VS

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking698not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.27no data
Power efficiency1.34no data
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)Generation 12.5 (2021−2023)
GPU code nameGT200BArctic Sound
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Release date23 December 2008 (15 years ago)2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$359 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores2408192
Core clock speed648 MHz900 MHz
Number of transistors1,400 million8,000 million
Manufacturing process technology55 nm10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)204 Watt500 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature105 °Cno data
Texture fill rate51.84230.4
Floating-point processing power0.7085 TFLOPS14.75 TFLOPS
ROPs32128
TMUs80256

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).

InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Length267 mm267 mm
Height4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-pin8-pin EPS
SLI options+-

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 typeGDDR3HBM2e
Maximum RAM amount1 GB16 GB
Memory bus width512 Bit4096 Bit
Memory clock speed1242 MHz1200 MHz
Memory bandwidth159.0 GB/s1.23 TB/s

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 ConnectorsHDTVTwo Dual Link DVINo outputs
Multi monitor support+no data
HDMI+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIS/PDIFno data

Supported technologies

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

High Dynamic-Range Lighting (HDRR)128bitno data

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model4.06.6
OpenGL2.14.6
OpenCL1.13.0
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA+-

Pros & cons summary


Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 16 GB
Chip lithography 55 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 204 Watt 500 Watt

GTX 285 has 145.1% lower power consumption.

Arctic Sound-M, on the other hand, has a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 450% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between GeForce GTX 285 and Arctic Sound-M. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 285 is a desktop card while Arctic Sound-M is a workstation one.


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

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce GTX 285
GeForce GTX 285
Intel Arctic Sound-M
Arctic Sound-M

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.7 110 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 285 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate Arctic Sound-M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.