GeForce GTX 285M vs GTX 480M

Place in the ranking	686	949
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	2.90	1.51
Architecture	Fermi (2010−2014)	Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code name	GF100	G92
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	25 May 2010 (14 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	352	128
Core clock speed	425 MHz	600 MHz
Number of transistors	3,100 million	754 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	75 Watt
Texture fill rate	18.70	38.40
Floating-point processing power	0.5984 TFLOPS	0.384 TFLOPS
Gigaflops	no data	576
ROPs	32	16
TMUs	44	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	large	large
Bus support	PCI-E 2.0	PCI-E 2.0
Interface	MXM-B (3.0)	MXM-B (3.0)
Supplementary power connectors	None	no data
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	256 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	1200 MHz	Up to 1020 MHz
Memory bandwidth	76.8 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
HDMI	-	+
Maximum VGA resolution	2048x1536	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.

Power management

no data

8.0

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 API	11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model	5.1	4.0
OpenGL	4.5	2.1
OpenCL	1.1	1.1
Vulkan	N/A	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.

GTX 480M 4.21
+155%

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.

GTX 480M 1617
+154%

GTX 285M 636

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 480M 8872
+36.5%

GTX 285M 6498

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	33 +57.1%	21 −57.1%
Full HD	39 +34.5%	29 −34.5%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +33.3%	9−10 −33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	9−10 +125%	4−5 −125%
Elden Ring	10−11 +400%	2−3 −400%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	12−14 +500%	2−3 −500%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +33.3%	9−10 −33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	9−10 +125%	4−5 −125%
Forza Horizon 4	18−20 +80%	10−11 −80%
Metro Exodus	9−10 +800%	1−2 −800%
Red Dead Redemption 2	14−16 +100%	7−8 −100%
Valorant	8−9 +167%	3−4 −167%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	12−14 +500%	2−3 −500%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +33.3%	9−10 −33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	9−10 +125%	4−5 −125%
Dota 2	12−14 +550%	2−3 −550%
Elden Ring	10−11 +400%	2−3 −400%
Far Cry 5	21−24 +75%	12−14 −75%
Fortnite	24−27 +200%	8−9 −200%
Forza Horizon 4	18−20 +80%	10−11 −80%
Grand Theft Auto V	12−14 +333%	3−4 −333%
Metro Exodus	9−10 +800%	1−2 −800%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	35−40 +118%	16−18 −118%
Red Dead Redemption 2	14−16 +100%	7−8 −100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 +75%	8−9 −75%
Valorant	8−9 +167%	3−4 −167%
World of Tanks	70−75 +115%	30−35 −115%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	12−14 +500%	2−3 −500%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +33.3%	9−10 −33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	9−10 +125%	4−5 −125%
Dota 2	12−14 +550%	2−3 −550%
Far Cry 5	21−24 +75%	12−14 −75%
Forza Horizon 4	18−20 +80%	10−11 −80%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	35−40 +118%	16−18 −118%
Valorant	8−9 +167%	3−4 −167%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	2−3	0−1
Elden Ring	4−5	0−1
Grand Theft Auto V	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	27−30 +164%	10−12 −164%
Red Dead Redemption 2	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
World of Tanks	30−33 +200%	10−11 −200%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	6−7 +200%	2−3 −200%
Counter-Strike 2	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 +100%	2−3 −100%
Far Cry 5	9−10 +50%	6−7 −50%
Forza Horizon 4	5−6 +400%	1−2 −400%
Metro Exodus	1−2	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	5−6 +66.7%	3−4 −66.7%
Valorant	12−14 +71.4%	7−8 −71.4%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Elden Ring	2−3	0−1
Grand Theft Auto V	16−18 +6.7%	14−16 −6.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	12−14 +140%	5−6 −140%
Red Dead Redemption 2	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 +6.7%	14−16 −6.7%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Dota 2	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Far Cry 5	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Fortnite	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Forza Horizon 4	2−3	0−1
Valorant	4−5 +100%	2−3 −100%

This is how GTX 480M and GTX 285M compete in popular games:

GTX 480M is 57% faster in 900p
GTX 480M is 34% faster in 1080p

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

in Metro Exodus, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the GTX 480M is 800% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

GTX 480M is ahead in 44 tests (92%)
there's a draw in 4 tests (8%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	4.21	1.65
Recency	25 May 2010	1 February 2010
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	1 GB
Chip lithography	40 nm	65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	75 Watt

GTX 480M has a 155.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 months, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 62.5% more advanced lithography process.

GTX 285M, on the other hand, has 33.3% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 480M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 285M in performance tests.

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