GeForce GT 720M vs GTX 285M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 285M and GeForce GT 720M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTX 285M
2010
1 GB GDDR3, 75 Watt
1.65
+38.7%

GTX 285M outperforms GT 720M by a substantial 39% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking9471057
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency1.512.47
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)Kepler 2.0 (2013−2015)
GPU code nameG92GK208
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date1 February 2010 (14 years ago)25 December 2013 (11 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 cores128192
Core clock speed600 MHz719 MHz
Boost clock speedno data758 MHz
Number of transistors754 million915 million
Manufacturing process technology65 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt33 Watt
Texture fill rate38.4012.13
Floating-point processing power0.384 TFLOPS0.2911 TFLOPS
Gigaflops576no data
ROPs168
TMUs6416

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 sizelargemedium sized
Bus supportPCI-E 2.0PCI Express 2.0
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)PCIe 2.0 x8
SLI options2-way-
MXM TypeMXM 3.0 Type-Bno data

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 typeGDDR3DDR3
Maximum RAM amount1 GB2 GB
Standard memory configurationno dataDDR3
Memory bus width256 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speedUp to 1020 MHz800 MHz
Memory bandwidth61 GB/s12.8 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 ConnectorsSingle Link DVIVGALVDSHDMIDual Link DVIDisplayPortNo outputs
eDP 1.2 signal supportno dataUp to 2560x1600
LVDS signal supportno dataUp to 1920x1200
VGA аnalog display supportno dataUp to 2048x1536
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) supportno dataUp to 2560x1600
HDMI++
HDCP content protection-+
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIS/PDIFno data
7.1 channel HD audio on HDMI-+
TrueHD and DTS-HD audio bitstreaming-+

Supported technologies

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

Blu-Ray 3D Support-+
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder-+
Optimus-+
Power management8.0no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 API
Shader Model4.05.1
OpenGL2.14.5
OpenCL1.11.1
VulkanN/A1.1.126
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.

GTX 285M 1.65
+38.7%
GT 720M 1.19

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 285M 636
+38.6%
GT 720M 459

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

GTX 285M 6498
+41.7%
GT 720M 4585

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:

900p21
+50%
14−16
−50%
Full HD30
+131%
13
−131%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
−500%
30
+500%
Hitman 3 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
+14.3%
14−16
−14.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 9−10
+12.5%
8−9
−12.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+6.3%
30−35
−6.3%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Hitman 3 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
+14.3%
14−16
−14.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 9−10
+12.5%
8−9
−12.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
−33.3%
16
+33.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+6.3%
30−35
−6.3%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Hitman 3 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
+14.3%
14−16
−14.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 9−10
+12.5%
8−9
−12.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+9.1%
10−12
−9.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+6.3%
30−35
−6.3%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%

1440p
High Preset

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

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Hitman 3 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 9−10
+80%
5−6
−80%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 1−2 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

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

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%

This is how GTX 285M and GT 720M compete in popular games:

  • GTX 285M is 50% faster in 900p
  • GTX 285M is 131% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the GTX 285M is 400% faster.
  • in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the GT 720M is 500% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GTX 285M is ahead in 36 tests (77%)
  • GT 720M is ahead in 2 tests (4%)
  • there's a draw in 9 tests (19%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.65 1.19
Recency 1 February 2010 25 December 2013
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 2 GB
Chip lithography 65 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 33 Watt

GTX 285M has a 38.7% higher aggregate performance score.

GT 720M, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 132.1% more advanced lithography process, and 127.3% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 285M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 720M in performance tests.


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 285M
GeForce GTX 285M
NVIDIA GeForce GT 720M
GeForce GT 720M

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.


3.8 4 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 967 votes

Rate GeForce GT 720M 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.