GeForce RTX 2070 Super Max-Q vs GTX 485M SLI

Place in the ranking	480	143
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	6.28	30.56
Architecture	Fermi (2010−2014)	Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code name	N11E-GTX-A1	TU104
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	6 January 2011 (14 years ago)	2 April 2020 (4 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	768	2560
Core clock speed	575 MHz	930 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1155 MHz
Number of transistors	no data	13,600 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	80 Watt
Texture fill rate	no data	184.8
Floating-point processing power	no data	5.914 TFLOPS
ROPs	no data	64
TMUs	no data	160
Tensor Cores	no data	320
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	40

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
Interface	no data	PCIe 3.0 x16
Supplementary power connectors	no data	None

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	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	2x2 GB	8 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	1500 MHz	1375 MHz
Memory bandwidth	no data	352.0 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	no data	No outputs
G-SYNC support	-	+

Supported technologies

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

VR Ready

no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	11	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	no data	6.5
OpenGL	no data	4.6
OpenCL	no data	1.2
Vulkan	-	1.2.140
CUDA	-	7.5

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 485M SLI 9.13

RTX 2070 Super Max-Q 35.51
+289%

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

GTX 485M SLI 5334

RTX 2070 Super Max-Q 27724
+420%

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 485M SLI 24830

RTX 2070 Super Max-Q 65101
+162%

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	89 −237%	300−350 +237%
Full HD	97 −7.2%	104 +7.2%
1440p	16−18 −338%	70 +338%
4K	12−14 −308%	49 +308%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	16−18 −324%	70−75 +324%
Cyberpunk 2077	18−20 −317%	75−80 +317%
Elden Ring	24−27 −373%	120−130 +373%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	30−33 −197%	89 +197%
Counter-Strike 2	16−18 −324%	70−75 +324%
Cyberpunk 2077	18−20 −88.9%	34 +88.9%
Forza Horizon 4	35−40 −367%	160−170 +367%
Metro Exodus	24−27 −308%	98 +308%
Red Dead Redemption 2	24−27 −336%	109 +336%
Valorant	30−35 −376%	157 +376%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	30−33 −227%	95−100 +227%
Counter-Strike 2	16−18 −324%	70−75 +324%
Cyberpunk 2077	18−20 −55.6%	28 +55.6%
Dota 2	30−35 −288%	128 +288%
Elden Ring	24−27 −373%	120−130 +373%
Far Cry 5	35−40 −132%	88 +132%
Fortnite	50−55 −196%	160−170 +196%
Forza Horizon 4	35−40 −367%	160−170 +367%
Grand Theft Auto V	30−35 −291%	125 +291%
Metro Exodus	24−27 −233%	80 +233%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	70−75 −170%	190−200 +170%
Red Dead Redemption 2	24−27 −104%	51 +104%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	27−30 −339%	120−130 +339%
Valorant	30−35 −185%	94 +185%
World of Tanks	130−140 −108%	270−280 +108%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	30−33 −167%	80 +167%
Counter-Strike 2	16−18 −324%	70−75 +324%
Cyberpunk 2077	18−20 −33.3%	24 +33.3%
Dota 2	30−35 −285%	127 +285%
Far Cry 5	35−40 −145%	90−95 +145%
Forza Horizon 4	35−40 −367%	160−170 +367%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	70−75 −170%	190−200 +170%
Valorant	30−35 −312%	136 +312%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	10−12 −482%	60−65 +482%
Elden Ring	12−14 −483%	70−75 +483%
Grand Theft Auto V	10−12 −491%	65−70 +491%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	40−45 −298%	170−180 +298%
Red Dead Redemption 2	8−9 −313%	33 +313%
World of Tanks	65−70 −242%	220−230 +242%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	16−18 −347%	76 +347%
Counter-Strike 2	10−11 −240%	30−35 +240%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 −386%	30−35 +386%
Far Cry 5	18−20 −495%	110−120 +495%
Forza Horizon 4	18−20 −426%	100−105 +426%
Metro Exodus	16−18 −369%	75 +369%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−12 −436%	55−60 +436%
Valorant	21−24 −335%	100 +335%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	3−4 −1100%	35−40 +1100%
Dota 2	20−22 −265%	73 +265%
Elden Ring	5−6 −560%	30−35 +560%
Grand Theft Auto V	18−20 −284%	73 +284%
Metro Exodus	5−6 −460%	28 +460%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	24−27 −335%	110−120 +335%
Red Dead Redemption 2	6−7 −250%	21 +250%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	18−20 −284%	73 +284%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	8−9 −425%	42 +425%
Counter-Strike 2	3−4 −1100%	35−40 +1100%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −650%	14−16 +650%
Dota 2	20−22 −415%	103 +415%
Far Cry 5	10−12 −364%	50−55 +364%
Fortnite	9−10 −444%	45−50 +444%
Forza Horizon 4	10−12 −427%	55−60 +427%
Valorant	9−10 −467%	51 +467%

This is how GTX 485M SLI and RTX 2070 Super Max-Q compete in popular games:

RTX 2070 Super Max-Q is 237% faster in 900p
RTX 2070 Super Max-Q is 7% faster in 1080p
RTX 2070 Super Max-Q is 338% faster in 1440p
RTX 2070 Super Max-Q is 308% faster in 4K

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

in Counter-Strike 2, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the RTX 2070 Super Max-Q is 1100% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Without exception, RTX 2070 Super Max-Q surpassed GTX 485M SLI in all 63 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	9.13	35.51
Recency	6 January 2011	2 April 2020
Chip lithography	40 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	80 Watt

RTX 2070 Super Max-Q has a 288.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, a 233.3% more advanced lithography process, and 25% lower power consumption.

The GeForce RTX 2070 Super Max-Q is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 485M SLI in performance tests.

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