GeForce 6610 XL vs GTX 285M
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce GTX 285M with GeForce 6610 XL, including specs and performance data.
285M outperforms 6610 XL by a whopping 567% 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 | 1057 | 1463 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 1.44 | no data |
| Architecture | Tesla (2006−2010) | Curie (2003−2013) |
| GPU code name | G92 | NV43 A2 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 1 February 2010 (16 years ago) | 14 November 2004 (21 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 | 128 | no data |
| Core clock speed | 600 MHz | 400 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 754 million | 146 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 65 nm | 110 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 75 Watt | no data |
| Texture fill rate | 38.40 | 3.200 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.384 TFLOPS | no data |
| Gigaflops | 576 | no data |
| ROPs | 16 | 4 |
| TMUs | 64 | 8 |
| L2 Cache | 64 KB | no 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 size | large | no data |
| Bus support | PCI-E 2.0 | no data |
| Interface | MXM-B (3.0) | PCIe 1.0 x16 |
| Width | no data | 1-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | None |
| SLI options | 2-way | - |
| MXM Type | MXM 3.0 Type-B | no data |
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 | GDDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 128 MB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | Up to 1020 MHz | 400 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 61 GB/s | 12.8 GB/s |
| 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 | Single Link DVIVGALVDSHDMIDual Link DVIDisplayPort | 1x DVI, 1x VGA |
| HDMI | + | - |
| Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | no data |
| Audio input for HDMI | S/PDIF | no data |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| Power management | 8.0 | no data |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11.1 (10_0) | 9.0c (9_3) |
| Shader Model | 4.0 | 3.0 |
| OpenGL | 2.1 | 2.1 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | N/A |
| Vulkan | N/A | N/A |
| CUDA | + | - |
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.
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.
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:
| 900p | 21
+600%
| 3−4
−600%
|
| Full HD | 30
+650%
| 4−5
−650%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Atomic Heart | 4−5 | 0−1 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4 | 0−1 |
Full HD
Medium
| Atomic Heart | 4−5 | 0−1 |
| Battlefield 5 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Fortnite | 5−6 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 8−9
+700%
|
1−2
−700%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−11
+900%
|
1−2
−900%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
+620%
|
5−6
−620%
|
Full HD
High
| Atomic Heart | 4−5 | 0−1 |
| Battlefield 5 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 30−35
+675%
|
4−5
−675%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 18−20
+800%
|
2−3
−800%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Fortnite | 5−6 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 8−9
+700%
|
1−2
−700%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Metro Exodus | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−11
+900%
|
1−2
−900%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 7−8
+600%
|
1−2
−600%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
+620%
|
5−6
−620%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 18−20
+800%
|
2−3
−800%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 8−9
+700%
|
1−2
−700%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−11
+900%
|
1−2
−900%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 7−8
+600%
|
1−2
−600%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
+620%
|
5−6
−620%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 5−6 | 0−1 |
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 4−5 | 0−1 |
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 9−10
+800%
|
1−2
−800%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 14−16
+600%
|
2−3
−600%
|
| Valorant | 10−11
+900%
|
1−2
−900%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 2−3 | 0−1 |
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3 | 0−1 |
4K
High
| Atomic Heart | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
+650%
|
2−3
−650%
|
| Valorant | 8−9
+700%
|
1−2
−700%
|
4K
Ultra
| Dota 2 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3 | 0−1 |
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3 | 0−1 |
This is how GTX 285M and 6610 XL compete in popular games:
- GTX 285M is 600% faster in 900p
- GTX 285M is 650% faster in 1080p
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.40 | 0.21 |
| Recency | 1 February 2010 | 14 November 2004 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 128 MB |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 110 nm |
GTX 285M has a 567% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 69% more advanced lithography process.
The GeForce GTX 285M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 6610 XL in performance tests.
Be aware that GeForce GTX 285M is a notebook graphics card while GeForce 6610 XL is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
