GeForce RTX 4090 vs GTX 285

Place in the ranking	711	2
Place by popularity	not in top-100	8
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.30	18.84
Power efficiency	1.32	15.26
Architecture	Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)	Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code name	GT200B	AD102
Market segment	Desktop	Desktop
Release date	23 December 2008 (16 years ago)	20 September 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$359	$1,599

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

RTX 4090 has 6180% better value for money than GTX 285.

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	240	16384
Core clock speed	648 MHz	2235 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	2520 MHz
Number of transistors	1,400 million	76,300 million
Manufacturing process technology	55 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	204 Watt	450 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature	105 °C	no data
Texture fill rate	51.84	1,290
Floating-point processing power	0.7085 TFLOPS	82.58 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	176
TMUs	80	512
Tensor Cores	no data	512
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	128

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).

Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x16
Length	267 mm	304 mm
Height	4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)	no data
Width	2-slot	3-slot
Supplementary power connectors	2x 6-pin	1x 16-pin
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 type	GDDR3	GDDR6X
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	24 GB
Memory bus width	512 Bit	384 Bit
Memory clock speed	1242 MHz	1313 MHz
Memory bandwidth	159.0 GB/s	1.01 TB/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	HDTVTwo Dual Link DVI	1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a
Multi monitor support	+	no data
HDMI	+	+
Maximum VGA resolution	2048x1536	no data
Audio input for HDMI	S/PDIF	no 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)

128bit

no data

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX	11.1 (10_0)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	4.0	6.8
OpenGL	2.1	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	3.0
Vulkan	N/A	1.3
CUDA	+	8.9

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.

GTX 285 3.75

RTX 4090 95.87
+2457%

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.

GTX 285 1502

RTX 4090 38419
+2458%

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:

Full HD	10−12 −2480%	258 +2480%
1440p	7−8 −2729%	198 +2729%
4K	5−6 −2740%	142 +2740%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	35.90 −479%	6.20 +479%
1440p	51.29 −535%	8.08 +535%
4K	71.80 −538%	11.26 +538%

RTX 4090 has 479% lower cost per frame in 1080p
RTX 4090 has 535% lower cost per frame in 1440p
RTX 4090 has 538% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	212 +0%	212 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	225 +0%	225 +0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	215 +0%	215 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	111 +0%	111 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	555 +0%	555 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	309 +0%	309 +0%
Metro Exodus	178 +0%	178 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	150−160 +0%	150−160 +0%
Valorant	826 +0%	826 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	199 +0%	199 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	107 +0%	107 +0%
Dota 2	200 +0%	200 +0%
Far Cry 5	150 +0%	150 +0%
Fortnite	300−350 +0%	300−350 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	548 +0%	548 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	329 +0%	329 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	174 +0%	174 +0%
Metro Exodus	183 +0%	183 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	210−220 +0%	210−220 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	150−160 +0%	150−160 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	170−180 +0%	170−180 +0%
Valorant	750−800 +0%	750−800 +0%
World of Tanks	270−280 +0%	270−280 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	185 +0%	185 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	105 +0%	105 +0%
Dota 2	224 +0%	224 +0%
Far Cry 5	190−200 +0%	190−200 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	544 +0%	544 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	279 +0%	279 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	210−220 +0%	210−220 +0%
Valorant	680 +0%	680 +0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	162 +0%	162 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	161 +0%	161 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 +0%	170−180 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	90−95 +0%	90−95 +0%
World of Tanks	500−550 +0%	500−550 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	85−90 +0%	85−90 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	77 +0%	77 +0%
Far Cry 5	160−170 +0%	160−170 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	507 +0%	507 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	239 +0%	239 +0%
Metro Exodus	152 +0%	152 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	262 +0%	262 +0%
Valorant	572 +0%	572 +0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	130 +0%	130 +0%
Dota 2	187 +0%	187 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	187 +0%	187 +0%
Metro Exodus	137 +0%	137 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	200−210 +0%	200−210 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	60−65 +0%	60−65 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	187 +0%	187 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	90−95 +0%	90−95 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	38 +0%	38 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	40 +0%	40 +0%
Dota 2	227 +0%	227 +0%
Far Cry 5	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%
Fortnite	95−100 +0%	95−100 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	284 +0%	284 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	161 +0%	161 +0%
Valorant	364 +0%	364 +0%

This is how GTX 285 and RTX 4090 compete in popular games:

RTX 4090 is 2480% faster in 1080p
RTX 4090 is 2729% faster in 1440p
RTX 4090 is 2740% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 63 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	3.75	95.87
Recency	23 December 2008	20 September 2022
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	24 GB
Chip lithography	55 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	204 Watt	450 Watt

GTX 285 has 120.6% lower power consumption.

RTX 4090, on the other hand, has a 2456.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 13 years, a 2300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 1000% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce RTX 4090 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 285 in performance tests.

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