RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile vs GeForce GTX 285M SLI
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce GTX 285M SLI with RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile, including specs and performance data.
RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile outperforms 285M SLI by a whopping 831% 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 | 774 | 163 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 1.97 | 55.06 |
| Architecture | G9x (2007−2010) | Ada Lovelace (2022−2024) |
| GPU code name | N10E-GTX | AD107 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Mobile workstation |
| Release date | 2 March 2009 (17 years ago) | 21 March 2023 (3 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 | 3072 |
| Core clock speed | 576 MHz | 1635 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 2115 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 1508 Million | 18,900 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 55 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 150 Watt | 50 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 203.0 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 12.99 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | no data | 48 |
| TMUs | no data | 96 |
| Tensor Cores | no data | 96 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 24 |
| L1 Cache | no data | 3 MB |
| L2 Cache | no data | 12 MB |
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 | large |
| Interface | no data | PCIe 4.0 x16 |
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 | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 8 GB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1020 MHz | 2000 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 256.0 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
| Resizable BAR | - | + |
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 |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 10 | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | no data | 6.8 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | no data | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | - | 1.3 |
| CUDA | + | 8.9 |
| DLSS | - | + |
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.
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.
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
−817%
| 550−600
+817%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Atomic Heart | 9−10
−789%
|
80−85
+789%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 14−16
−767%
|
130−140
+767%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 8−9
−775%
|
70−75
+775%
|
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 5−6
−800%
|
45−50
+800%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Atomic Heart | 9−10
−789%
|
80−85
+789%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 14−16
−767%
|
130−140
+767%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 14−16
−767%
|
130−140
+767%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 8−9
−775%
|
70−75
+775%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 10−12
−809%
|
100−105
+809%
|
| Fortnite | 21−24
−809%
|
200−210
+809%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 18−20
−789%
|
160−170
+789%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 16−18
−775%
|
140−150
+775%
|
| Valorant | 50−55
−749%
|
450−500
+749%
|
Full HD
High
| Atomic Heart | 9−10
−789%
|
80−85
+789%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 14−16
−767%
|
130−140
+767%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 14−16
−767%
|
130−140
+767%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 65−70
−770%
|
600−650
+770%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 8−9
−775%
|
70−75
+775%
|
| Dota 2 | 35−40
−757%
|
300−310
+757%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 10−12
−809%
|
100−105
+809%
|
| Fortnite | 21−24
−809%
|
200−210
+809%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 18−20
−789%
|
160−170
+789%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 10−12
−809%
|
100−105
+809%
|
| Metro Exodus | 7−8
−829%
|
65−70
+829%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 16−18
−775%
|
140−150
+775%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 12−14
−817%
|
110−120
+817%
|
| Valorant | 50−55
−749%
|
450−500
+749%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 14−16
−767%
|
130−140
+767%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 8−9
−775%
|
70−75
+775%
|
| Dota 2 | 35−40
−757%
|
300−310
+757%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 10−12
−809%
|
100−105
+809%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 18−20
−789%
|
160−170
+789%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 16−18
−775%
|
140−150
+775%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 12−14
−817%
|
110−120
+817%
|
| Valorant | 50−55
−749%
|
450−500
+749%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 21−24
−809%
|
200−210
+809%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8
−829%
|
65−70
+829%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 27−30
−831%
|
270−280
+831%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 2−3
−800%
|
18−20
+800%
|
| Metro Exodus | 2−3
−800%
|
18−20
+800%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 30−35
−806%
|
290−300
+806%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
−821%
|
350−400
+821%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−800%
|
18−20
+800%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 7−8
−829%
|
65−70
+829%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 9−10
−789%
|
80−85
+789%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
−800%
|
45−50
+800%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 7−8
−829%
|
65−70
+829%
|
4K
High
| Atomic Heart | 3−4
−800%
|
27−30
+800%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 16−18
−775%
|
140−150
+775%
|
| Valorant | 16−18
−782%
|
150−160
+782%
|
4K
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−800%
|
9−10
+800%
|
| Dota 2 | 12−14
−817%
|
110−120
+817%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3
−800%
|
18−20
+800%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
−775%
|
35−40
+775%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 4−5
−775%
|
35−40
+775%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 4−5
−775%
|
35−40
+775%
|
This is how GTX 285M SLI and RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile compete in popular games:
- RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile is 817% faster in 1080p
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 3.82 | 35.57 |
| Recency | 2 March 2009 | 21 March 2023 |
| Chip lithography | 55 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 150 Watt | 50 Watt |
RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile has a 831% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 14 years, a 1000% more advanced lithography process, and 200% lower power consumption.
The RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 285M SLI in performance tests.
Be aware that GeForce GTX 285M SLI is a notebook graphics card while RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile is a mobile workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
