RTX 6000 Ada Generation vs GeForce GTX 285

Place in the ranking	705	16
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.30	7.19
Power efficiency	1.32	16.75
Architecture	Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)	Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code name	GT200B	AD102
Market segment	Desktop	Workstation
Release date	23 December 2008 (16 years ago)	3 December 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$359	$6,799

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

RTX 6000 Ada Generation has 2297% 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	18176
Core clock speed	648 MHz	915 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	2505 MHz
Number of transistors	1,400 million	76,300 million
Manufacturing process technology	55 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	204 Watt	300 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature	105 °C	no data
Texture fill rate	51.84	1,423
Floating-point processing power	0.7085 TFLOPS	91.06 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	192
TMUs	80	568
Tensor Cores	no data	568
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	142

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	267 mm
Height	4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)	no data
Width	2-slot	2-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	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	48 GB
Memory bus width	512 Bit	384 Bit
Memory clock speed	1242 MHz	2500 MHz
Memory bandwidth	159.0 GB/s	960.0 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	HDTVTwo Dual Link DVI	4x 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 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 3.91

RTX 6000 Ada Generation 73.01
+1767%

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 1505

RTX 6000 Ada Generation 28066
+1765%

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 −1800%	190 +1800%
1440p	8−9 −1875%	158 +1875%
4K	6−7 −1867%	118 +1867%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	35.90 −0.3%	35.78 +0.3%
1440p	44.88 −4.3%	43.03 +4.3%
4K	59.83 −3.8%	57.62 +3.8%

GTX 285 and RTX 6000 Ada Generation have nearly equal cost per frame in 1080p
GTX 285 and RTX 6000 Ada Generation have nearly equal cost per frame in 1440p
GTX 285 and RTX 6000 Ada Generation have nearly equal cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	164 +0%	164 +0%
Elden Ring	280−290 +0%	280−290 +0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	163 +0%	163 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	400−450 +0%	400−450 +0%
Metro Exodus	113 +0%	113 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	130−140 +0%	130−140 +0%
Valorant	350−400 +0%	350−400 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	155 +0%	155 +0%
Dota 2	160−170 +0%	160−170 +0%
Elden Ring	280−290 +0%	280−290 +0%
Far Cry 5	123 +0%	123 +0%
Fortnite	290−300 +0%	290−300 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	400−450 +0%	400−450 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	160−170 +0%	160−170 +0%
Metro Exodus	106 +0%	106 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	210−220 +0%	210−220 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	130−140 +0%	130−140 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	170−180 +0%	170−180 +0%
Valorant	350−400 +0%	350−400 +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	147 +0%	147 +0%
Far Cry 5	130−140 +0%	130−140 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	400−450 +0%	400−450 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	210−220 +0%	210−220 +0%
Valorant	350−400 +0%	350−400 +0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	140−150 +0%	140−150 +0%
Elden Ring	190−200 +0%	190−200 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	140−150 +0%	140−150 +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%
Counter-Strike 2	131 +0%	131 +0%
Far Cry 5	160−170 +0%	160−170 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	270−280 +0%	270−280 +0%
Metro Exodus	99 +0%	99 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	219 +0%	219 +0%
Valorant	300−350 +0%	300−350 +0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	40 +0%	40 +0%
Dota 2	160−170 +0%	160−170 +0%
Elden Ring	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	160−170 +0%	160−170 +0%
Metro Exodus	90 +0%	90 +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	160−170 +0%	160−170 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	90−95 +0%	90−95 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	90−95 +0%	90−95 +0%
Far Cry 5	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%
Fortnite	95−100 +0%	95−100 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	140−150 +0%	140−150 +0%
Valorant	190−200 +0%	190−200 +0%

This is how GTX 285 and RTX 6000 Ada Generation compete in popular games:

RTX 6000 Ada Generation is 1800% faster in 1080p
RTX 6000 Ada Generation is 1875% faster in 1440p
RTX 6000 Ada Generation is 1867% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 55 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	3.91	73.01
Recency	23 December 2008	3 December 2022
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	48 GB
Chip lithography	55 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	204 Watt	300 Watt

GTX 285 has 47.1% lower power consumption.

RTX 6000 Ada Generation, on the other hand, has a 1767.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 13 years, a 4700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 1000% more advanced lithography process.

The RTX 6000 Ada Generation is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 285 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 285 is a desktop card while RTX 6000 Ada Generation is a workstation one.

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