Iris Plus Graphics 650 vs GeForce GTX 285M SLI
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce GTX 285M SLI and Iris Plus Graphics 650, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
Plus Graphics 650 outperforms 285M SLI by a moderate 10% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 770 | 734 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 1.97 | 21.76 |
| Architecture | G9x (2007−2010) | Generation 9.5 (2016−2020) |
| GPU code name | N10E-GTX | Kaby Lake GT3e |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 2 March 2009 (17 years ago) | 3 January 2017 (9 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. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 256 | 384 |
| Core clock speed | 576 MHz | 300 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 1150 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 1508 Million | 189 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 55 nm | 14 nm++ |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 150 Watt | 15 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 55.20 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 0.8832 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | no data | 6 |
| TMUs | no data | 48 |
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 | no data |
| Interface | no data | Ring Bus |
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 | GDDR3 | DDR3L/LPDDR3/DDR4 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 32 GB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | System Shared |
| Memory clock speed | 1020 MHz | System Shared |
| 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 Connectors | no data | Portable Device Dependent |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| Quick Sync | no data | + |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 10 | 12 (12_1) |
| Shader Model | no data | 6.4 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | no data | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | - | 1.3 |
| 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 HD | 60
+173%
| 22
−173%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 14−16
−20%
|
18−20
+20%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
| Palworld | 10−11
−10%
|
10−12
+10%
|
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 5−6
−20%
|
6−7
+20%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 14−16
−13.3%
|
16−18
+13.3%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 14−16
−20%
|
18−20
+20%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 10−12
−18.2%
|
12−14
+18.2%
|
| Fortnite | 21−24
−13.6%
|
24−27
+13.6%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 18−20
−11.1%
|
20−22
+11.1%
|
| Palworld | 10−11
−10%
|
10−12
+10%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 16−18
−6.3%
|
16−18
+6.3%
|
| Valorant | 50−55
−5.7%
|
55−60
+5.7%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 14−16
−13.3%
|
16−18
+13.3%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 14−16
−20%
|
18−20
+20%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 65−70
−8.7%
|
75−80
+8.7%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 35−40
+16.7%
|
30
−16.7%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 10−12
−18.2%
|
12−14
+18.2%
|
| Fortnite | 21−24
−13.6%
|
24−27
+13.6%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 18−20
−11.1%
|
20−22
+11.1%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 10−12
+37.5%
|
8
−37.5%
|
| Metro Exodus | 7−8
−14.3%
|
8−9
+14.3%
|
| Palworld | 10−11
−10%
|
10−12
+10%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 16−18
−6.3%
|
16−18
+6.3%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 12−14
−8.3%
|
12−14
+8.3%
|
| Valorant | 50−55
−5.7%
|
55−60
+5.7%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 14−16
−13.3%
|
16−18
+13.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 35−40
+40%
|
25
−40%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 10−12
−18.2%
|
12−14
+18.2%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 18−20
−11.1%
|
20−22
+11.1%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 16−18
−6.3%
|
16−18
+6.3%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 12−14
−8.3%
|
12−14
+8.3%
|
| Valorant | 50−55
−5.7%
|
55−60
+5.7%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 21−24
−13.6%
|
24−27
+13.6%
|
| Palworld | 10−11
−10%
|
10−12
+10%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8
−14.3%
|
8−9
+14.3%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 27−30
−10.3%
|
30−35
+10.3%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 30−35
−3.1%
|
30−35
+3.1%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
−13.5%
|
40−45
+13.5%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−50%
|
3−4
+50%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 9−10
−11.1%
|
10−11
+11.1%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
−20%
|
6−7
+20%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 7−8
−14.3%
|
8−9
+14.3%
|
| Palworld | 5−6
−20%
|
6−7
+20%
|
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 16−18
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
| Valorant | 16−18
−5.9%
|
18−20
+5.9%
|
4K
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 12−14
−16.7%
|
14−16
+16.7%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3
−50%
|
3−4
+50%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
−25%
|
5−6
+25%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
This is how GTX 285M SLI and Iris Plus Graphics 650 compete in popular games:
- GTX 285M SLI is 173% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Dota 2, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GTX 285M SLI is 40% faster.
- in Cyberpunk 2077, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Iris Plus Graphics 650 is 50% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- GTX 285M SLI performs better in 3 tests (5%)
- Iris Plus Graphics 650 performs better in 43 tests (74%)
- there's a draw in 12 tests (21%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 3.82 | 4.22 |
| Recency | 2 March 2009 | 3 January 2017 |
| Chip lithography | 55 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 150 Watt | 15 Watt |
Iris Plus Graphics 650 has a 10% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 293% more advanced lithography process, and 900% lower power consumption.
The Iris Plus Graphics 650 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 285M SLI in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
