Radeon R9 285 vs GeForce RTX 3070 Max-Q

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot rated313
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data8.58
Power efficiencyno data6.33
ArchitectureAmpere (2020−2024)GCN 3.0 (2014−2019)
GPU code nameGA104Tonga
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date12 January 2021 (3 years ago)2 September 2014 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$249

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores51201792
Core clock speed780 MHz918 MHz
Boost clock speed1290 MHzno data
Number of transistors17,400 million5,000 million
Manufacturing process technology8 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)80 Watt190 Watt
Texture fill rate206.4102.8
Floating-point processing power13.21 TFLOPS3.29 TFLOPS
ROPs8032
TMUs160112
Tensor Cores160no data
Ray Tracing Cores40no data

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
InterfacePCIe 4.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data221 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone2x 6-pin

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 typeGDDR6GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount8 GB2 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1500 MHz1375 MHz
Memory bandwidth384.0 GB/s176.0 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 ConnectorsNo outputs2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, 1x DisplayPort 1.2
HDMI-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_2)12 (12_0)
Shader Model6.56.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.02.1
Vulkan1.21.2.170
CUDA8.6-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 12 January 2021 2 September 2014
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 2 GB
Chip lithography 8 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 80 Watt 190 Watt

RTX 3070 Max-Q has an age advantage of 6 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 250% more advanced lithography process, and 137.5% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between GeForce RTX 3070 Max-Q and Radeon R9 285. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that GeForce RTX 3070 Max-Q is a notebook card while Radeon R9 285 is a desktop one.


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 RTX 3070 Max-Q
GeForce RTX 3070 Max-Q
AMD Radeon R9 285
Radeon R9 285

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.


3.8 146 votes

Rate GeForce RTX 3070 Max-Q on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2 76 votes

Rate Radeon R9 285 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.