Radeon R9 M485X vs Quadro NVS 285

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
210S 280 AGP 280 PCI 280 PCIe 280 SD 285 290 295
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
E8950 R9 M295X R9 M295X Mac Edition R9 M390X R9 M395X R9 M395X Mac Edition R9 M485X

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro NVS 285 with Radeon R9 M485X, including specs and performance data.

NVS 285
2006, $28
128 MB DDR, 18 Watt
0.11

R9 M485X outperforms NVS 285 by a whopping 8164% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Share:
NVS 285 NVS 285
R9 M485X R9 M485X

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1516524
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency0.472.80
ArchitectureCurie (2003−2013)GCN 3.0 (2014−2019)
GPU code nameNV44 A2Amethyst
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date6 June 2006 (19 years ago)15 May 2016 (9 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$27.99 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 coresno data2048
Core clock speed275 MHz723 MHz
Number of transistors75 million5,000 million
Manufacturing process technology110 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)18 Watt250 Watt
Texture fill rate1.10092.54
Floating-point processing powerno data2.961 TFLOPS
ROPs232
TMUs4128
L1 Cacheno data512 KB
L2 Cacheno data512 KB

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 sizeno datalarge
InterfacePCIe 1.0 x16MXM-B (3.0)
Length168 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeDDRGDDR5
Maximum RAM amount128 MB8 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed250 MHz1250 MHz
Memory bandwidth8 GB/s160.0 GB/s
Shared memoryno data-

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display Connectors1x DMS-59No outputs

API and SDK support

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

DirectX9.0c (9_3)12 (12_0)
Shader Model3.06.3
OpenGL2.14.6
OpenCLN/A2.0
VulkanN/A1.2.131

Synthetic benchmarks

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.

NVS 285 0.11
R9 M485X 9.09
+8164%

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.

NVS 285 44
Samples: 149
R9 M485X 3800
+8536%
Samples: 4

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Far Cry 5 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Fortnite 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Valorant 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Dota 2 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Far Cry 5 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Fortnite 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Metro Exodus 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Valorant 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Dota 2 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Far Cry 5 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Valorant 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Metro Exodus 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Valorant 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Metro Exodus 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Valorant 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Dota 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 60 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 0.11 9.09
Recency 6 June 2006 15 May 2016
Maximum RAM amount 128 MB 8 GB
Chip lithography 110 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 18 Watt 250 Watt

NVS 285 has 1289% lower power consumption.

R9 M485X, on the other hand, has a 8164% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, a 6300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 293% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon R9 M485X is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro NVS 285 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro NVS 285 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon R9 M485X is a notebook one.

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

NVS 285 Quadro NVS 285
vs
NVS 210S Quadro NVS 210S
R9 M485X Radeon R9 M485X
vs
GTX 680MX GeForce GTX 680MX
NVS 285 Quadro NVS 285
vs
FX 540 Quadro FX 540
Tesla C870 Tesla C870
vs
P104-100 P104 100
Tesla C870 Tesla C870
vs
GRID M6-8Q GRID M6-8Q
FX 4600 Quadro FX 4600
vs
Apple M1 7-Core GPU 7 Core GPU
FX 4600 SDI Quadro FX 4600 SDI
vs
RX 6900 RX 6900
FX 5600 Quadro FX 5600
vs
Xbox Series S GPU Xbox Series S GPU
NVS 285 Quadro NVS 285
vs
RX Vega 56 Mobile RX Vega 56 Mobile
FX 3500 Quadro FX 3500
vs
7800 GTX GeForce 7800 GTX
FX 1500 Quadro FX 1500
vs
7600 GT GeForce 7600 GT
FX 5500 SDI Quadro FX 5500 SDI
vs
RX 6800S RX 6800S
FX 560 Quadro FX 560
vs
Arc Pro A60 Pro A60

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.

4.2 6 votes

Rate Quadro NVS 285 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 3 votes

Rate Radeon R9 M485X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro NVS 285 or Radeon R9 M485X, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.