Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) vs GeForce GTX 285

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 285 with Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc), including specs and performance data.

GTX 285
2008, $359
1 GB GDDR3, 204 Watt
3.49

Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) outperforms GTX 285 by a whopping 176% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking790508
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.26no data
Power efficiency1.32no data
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)Xe LPG (2023−2025)
GPU code nameGT200BMeteor Lake iGPU
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date23 December 2008 (17 years ago)14 December 2023 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$359 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores2404
Core clock speed648 MHzno data
Boost clock speedno data1950 MHz
Number of transistors1,400 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology55 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)204 Wattno data
Maximum GPU temperature105 °Cno data
Texture fill rate51.84no data
Floating-point processing power0.7085 TFLOPSno data
ROPs32no data
TMUs80no data
L2 Cache256 KBno 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).

InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16no data
Length267 mmno data
Height4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-pinno data
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 typeGDDR3no data
Maximum RAM amount1 GBno data
Memory bus width512 Bitno data
Memory clock speed1242 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth159.0 GB/sno data
Shared memory-+

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 ConnectorsHDTVTwo Dual Link DVIno data
Multi monitor support+no data
HDMI+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIS/PDIFno data

Supported technologies

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

High Dynamic-Range Lighting (HDRR)128bitno data

API and SDK support

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12_2
Shader Model4.0no data
OpenGL2.1no data
OpenCL1.1no data
VulkanN/A-
CUDA+-

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:

Full HD9−10
−178%
25
+178%

Cost per frame, $

1080p39.89no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 13
+0%
13
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 11
+0%
11
+0%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 50
+0%
50
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Valorant 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%

Full HD
High

Atomic Heart 16
+0%
16
+0%
Battlefield 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 13
+0%
13
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Far Cry 5 24
+0%
24
+0%
Fortnite 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 39
+0%
39
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 15
+0%
15
+0%
Metro Exodus 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Valorant 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Atomic Heart 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Battlefield 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Fortnite 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30
+0%
30
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Valorant 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Metro Exodus 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Far Cry 5 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Valorant 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%

1440p
Epic

Atomic Heart 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Metro Exodus 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%

4K
Ultra

Atomic Heart 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Battlefield 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Fortnite 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Valorant 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

This is how GTX 285 and Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) compete in popular games:

  • Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) is 178% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 58 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.49 9.62
Recency 23 December 2008 14 December 2023
Chip lithography 55 nm 5 nm

Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) has a 176% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 14 years, and a 1000% more advanced lithography process.

The Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 285 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 285 is a desktop graphics card while Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) 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.

Community ratings

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


3.7 117 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 285 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.4 49 votes

Rate Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GTX 285 or Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc), agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.