GeForce MX110 vs GTX 485M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 485M and GeForce MX110, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTX 485M
2011
2 GB GDDR5, 100 Watt
6.12
+65%

GTX 485M outperforms MX110 by an impressive 65% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking581710
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency4.198.47
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)Maxwell (2014−2017)
GPU code nameGF104GM108S
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date5 January 2011 (13 years ago)17 November 2017 (7 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 cores384256
Core clock speed1150 MHz978 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1006 MHz
Number of transistors1,950 million1,020 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)100 Watt30 Watt
Texture fill rate36.8016.10
Floating-point processing power0.8832 TFLOPS0.5151 TFLOPS
ROPs328
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 sizelargeno data
Bus supportPCI-E 2.0no data
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)PCIe 3.0 x4
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone
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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount2 GB2 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1500 MHz1253 MHz
Memory bandwidth96.0 GB/s40.1 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 ConnectorsNo outputsPortable Device Dependent
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data

Supported technologies

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

Optimus-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (11_0)
Shader Model5.16.7 (5.1)
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.13.0
VulkanN/A1.3
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 485M 6.12
+65%
GeForce MX110 3.71

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 485M 2359
+64.8%
GeForce MX110 1431

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 2709
+27.7%
GeForce MX110 2121

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 13536
+48.4%
GeForce MX110 9124

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:

900p48
+77.8%
27−30
−77.8%
Full HD65
+282%
17
−282%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+42.9%
7−8
−42.9%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 16−18
+77.8%
9
−77.8%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%
Battlefield 5 16−18
+113%
8−9
−113%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
+62.5%
8
−62.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+42.9%
7−8
−42.9%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+30%
10
−30%
Far Cry New Dawn 16−18
+70%
10−11
−70%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+81.8%
21−24
−81.8%
Hitman 3 12−14
+33.3%
9−10
−33.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40
+42.3%
24−27
−42.3%
Metro Exodus 16−18
+23.1%
13
−23.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
+30.8%
13
−30.8%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 21−24
+31.3%
16
−31.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55
+19%
40−45
−19%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 16−18
+33.3%
12
−33.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%
Battlefield 5 16−18
+113%
8−9
−113%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
+62.5%
8−9
−62.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+42.9%
7−8
−42.9%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+62.5%
8
−62.5%
Far Cry New Dawn 16−18
+70%
10−11
−70%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+81.8%
21−24
−81.8%
Hitman 3 12−14
+33.3%
9−10
−33.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40
+42.3%
24−27
−42.3%
Metro Exodus 16−18
+220%
5
−220%
Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
+88.9%
9−10
−88.9%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 21−24
+50%
14−16
−50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 20−22
+33.3%
14−16
−33.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55
+19%
40−45
−19%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 16−18
+45.5%
10−12
−45.5%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
+62.5%
8−9
−62.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+42.9%
7−8
−42.9%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+117%
6
−117%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+81.8%
21−24
−81.8%
Hitman 3 12−14
+33.3%
9−10
−33.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40
+42.3%
24−27
−42.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 21−24
+50%
14−16
−50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 20−22
+300%
5
−300%
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55
+19%
40−45
−19%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
+88.9%
9−10
−88.9%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14
+71.4%
7−8
−71.4%
Far Cry New Dawn 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
+100%
3−4
−100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7
+100%
3−4
−100%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+500%
3−4
−500%
Hitman 3 10−11
+25%
8−9
−25%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
+44.4%
9−10
−44.4%
Metro Exodus 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+69.6%
21−24
−69.6%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 10−12
+57.1%
7−8
−57.1%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Hitman 3 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
+66.7%
9−10
−66.7%
Metro Exodus 3−4 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 0−1 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%

This is how GTX 485M and GeForce MX110 compete in popular games:

  • GTX 485M is 78% faster in 900p
  • GTX 485M is 282% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Forza Horizon 4, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GTX 485M is 500% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, GTX 485M surpassed GeForce MX110 in all 63 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 6.12 3.71
Recency 5 January 2011 17 November 2017
Chip lithography 40 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 100 Watt 30 Watt

GTX 485M has a 65% higher aggregate performance score.

GeForce MX110, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 6 years, a 42.9% more advanced lithography process, and 233.3% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 485M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce MX110 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 485M
GeForce GTX 485M
NVIDIA GeForce MX110
GeForce MX110

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.


1 3 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 485M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 2282 votes

Rate GeForce MX110 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.