GeForce GTX 485M vs FirePro S10000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared FirePro S10000 with GeForce GTX 485M, including specs and performance data.

S10000
2012, $3,599
6 GB GDDR5, 750 Watt
10.80
+92.5%

S10000 outperforms 485M by an impressive 93% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking461645
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.24no data
Power efficiency2.224.32
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2012−2020)Fermi (2010−2014)
GPU code nameTahitiGF104
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date12 November 2012 (13 years ago)5 January 2011 (14 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$3,599 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

Detailed specifications

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

Pipelines / CUDA cores4096 ×2384
Core clock speed825 MHz1150 MHz
Boost clock speed950 MHzno data
Number of transistors4,313 million1,950 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)750 Watt100 Watt
Texture fill rate106.4 ×236.80
Floating-point processing power3.405 TFLOPS ×20.8832 TFLOPS
ROPs32 ×232
TMUs112 ×264
L1 Cache448 KB512 KB
L2 Cache768 KB512 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).

Laptop sizeno datalarge
Bus supportPCIe 3.0PCI-E 2.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16MXM-B (3.0)
Length305 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Form factorfull height / full lengthno data
Supplementary power connectors2x 8-pinNone
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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount6 GB ×22 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit ×2256 Bit
Memory clock speed1250 MHz1500 MHz
Memory bandwidth480 GB/s ×296.0 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 Connectors1x DVI, 4x mini-DisplayPortNo outputs
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536
Dual-link DVI support+-

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (11_1)12 (11_0)
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.64.5
OpenCL1.21.1
Vulkan1.2.131N/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.

S10000 10.80
+92.5%
GTX 485M 5.61

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.

S10000 4537
+92.3%
Samples: 8
GTX 485M 2359
Samples: 24

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:

900p90−95
+87.5%
48
−87.5%
Full HD120−130
+81.8%
66
−81.8%

Cost per frame, $

1080p29.99no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Fortnite 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Valorant 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Dota 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Fortnite 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Metro Exodus 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Dota 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Metro Exodus 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Valorant 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Metro Exodus 0−1 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Valorant 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

This is how S10000 and GTX 485M compete in popular games:

  • S10000 is 88% faster in 900p
  • S10000 is 82% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 61 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 10.80 5.61
Recency 12 November 2012 5 January 2011
Maximum RAM amount 6 GB 2 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 750 Watt 100 Watt

S10000 has a 92.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, a 200% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

GTX 485M, on the other hand, has 650% lower power consumption.

The FirePro S10000 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 485M in performance tests.

Be aware that FirePro S10000 is a workstation graphics card while GeForce GTX 485M is a notebook one.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


AMD FirePro S10000
FirePro S10000
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 485M
GeForce GTX 485M

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 40 votes

Rate FirePro S10000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
1.5 4 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 485M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about FirePro S10000 or GeForce GTX 485M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.