Radeon R9 285 vs Graphics (Ryzen 7000)

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon Graphics (Ryzen 7000) with Radeon R9 285, including specs and performance data.

Graphics (Ryzen 7000)
2022
4.09

R9 285 outperforms Graphics (Ryzen 7000) by an impressive 74% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking747376
Place by popularity90not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data7.79
Power efficiencyno data6.54
ArchitectureRDNA 2 (2021−2023)GCN 3.0 (2014−2019)
GPU code nameRaphaelTonga
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date26 September 2022 (4 years ago)2 September 2014 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$249

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 cores1281792
Core clock speedno data918 MHz
Boost clock speed2200 MHzno data
Number of transistorsno data5,000 million
Manufacturing process technology6 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data190 Watt
Texture fill rateno data102.8
Floating-point processing powerno data3.29 TFLOPS
ROPsno data32
TMUsno data112
L1 Cacheno data448 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).

Interfaceno dataPCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data221 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data2x 6-pin

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 typeno dataGDDR5
Maximum RAM amountno data2 GB
Memory bus widthno data256 Bit
Memory clock speedno data1375 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data176.0 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 Connectorsno data2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, 1x DisplayPort 1.2
HDMI-+

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12_212 (12_0)
Shader Modelno data6.5
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data2.1
Vulkan-1.2.170

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.

Graphics (Ryzen 7000) 4.09
R9 285 16.03
+74.5%

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

Graphics (Ryzen 7000) 2338
R9 285 8570
+72.7%

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 HD19
−72.9%
70−75
+72.9%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data3.56

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Atomic Heart 10−11
−71.4%
35−40
+71.4%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
−73.8%
65−70
+73.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
−73.3%
30−33
+73.3%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 6−7
−71.4%
21−24
+71.4%

Full HD
Medium

Atomic Heart 10−11
−71.4%
35−40
+71.4%
Battlefield 5 16−18
−73.3%
60−65
+73.3%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
−73.8%
65−70
+73.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
−73.3%
30−33
+73.3%
Far Cry 5 12−14
−73.3%
45−50
+73.3%
Fortnite 24−27
−73.3%
90−95
+73.3%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
−72.9%
70−75
+72.9%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
−73.8%
65−70
+73.8%
Valorant 55−60
−73.8%
210−220
+73.8%

Full HD
High

Atomic Heart 10−11
−71.4%
35−40
+71.4%
Battlefield 5 16−18
−73.3%
60−65
+73.3%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
−73.8%
65−70
+73.8%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 70−75
−73.9%
280−290
+73.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
−73.3%
30−33
+73.3%
Dota 2 41
−74.4%
160−170
+74.4%
Far Cry 5 12−14
−73.3%
45−50
+73.3%
Fortnite 24−27
−73.3%
90−95
+73.3%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
−72.9%
70−75
+72.9%
Grand Theft Auto V 12−14
−74%
50−55
+74%
Metro Exodus 7−8
−74.1%
27−30
+74.1%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
−73.8%
65−70
+73.8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
−73.3%
45−50
+73.3%
Valorant 55−60
−73.8%
210−220
+73.8%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 16−18
−73.3%
60−65
+73.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
−73.3%
30−33
+73.3%
Dota 2 37
−73.6%
140−150
+73.6%
Far Cry 5 12−14
−73.3%
45−50
+73.3%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
−72.9%
70−75
+72.9%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
−73.8%
65−70
+73.8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
−73.3%
45−50
+73.3%
Valorant 55−60
−73.8%
210−220
+73.8%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 24−27
−73.3%
90−95
+73.3%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 8−9
−73.3%
30−33
+73.3%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 30−35
−74.2%
120−130
+74.2%
Grand Theft Auto V 2−3
−71.4%
7−8
+71.4%
Metro Exodus 2−3
−71.4%
7−8
+71.4%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
−72.5%
120−130
+72.5%
Valorant 40−45
−74.4%
160−170
+74.4%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 1−2
−66.7%
3−4
+66.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−70%
10−11
+70%
Far Cry 5 7−8
−74.1%
27−30
+74.1%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
−74.3%
35−40
+74.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
−72.2%
18−20
+72.2%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 8−9
−73.3%
30−33
+73.3%

4K
High

Atomic Heart 3−4
−70%
10−11
+70%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
−73.3%
60−65
+73.3%
Valorant 18−20
−74.3%
70−75
+74.3%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−66.7%
3−4
+66.7%
Dota 2 12−14
−74%
50−55
+74%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−70%
10−11
+70%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
−72.2%
18−20
+72.2%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 4−5
−71.4%
14−16
+71.4%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 4−5
−71.4%
14−16
+71.4%

This is how Graphics (Ryzen 7000) and R9 285 compete in popular games:

  • R9 285 is 73% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 4.09 16.03
Recency 26 September 2022 2 September 2014
Chip lithography 6 nm 28 nm

Graphics (Ryzen 7000) has an age advantage of 8 years, and a 79% more advanced lithography process.

R9 285, on the other hand, has a 74% higher aggregate performance score.

The Radeon R9 285 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon Graphics (Ryzen 7000) in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon Graphics (Ryzen 7000) is a notebook graphics card while Radeon R9 285 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.

Community ratings

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


3.2 393 votes

Rate Radeon Graphics (Ryzen 7000) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2 80 votes

Rate Radeon R9 285 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon Graphics (Ryzen 7000) or Radeon R9 285, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.