ATI Radeon HD 5950 vs GeForce GTX 285
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 695 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.27 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 1.33 | no data |
| Architecture | Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013) | TeraScale 2 (2009−2015) |
| GPU code name | GT200B | Hemlock |
| Market segment | Desktop | Desktop |
| Release date | 23 December 2008 (15 years ago) | no data (2024 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $359 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
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 cores | 240 | 1440 |
| Core clock speed | 648 MHz | 725 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 1,400 million | 2,154 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 55 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 204 Watt | 302 Watt |
| Maximum GPU temperature | 105 °C | no data |
| Texture fill rate | 51.84 | 52.20 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.7085 TFLOPS | no data |
| ROPs | 32 | 32 |
| TMUs | 80 | 72 |
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).
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Length | 267 mm | 280 mm |
| Height | 4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm) | no data |
| Width | 2-slot | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | 2x 6-pin | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |
| 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 type | GDDR3 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 1 GB |
| Memory bus width | 512 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1242 MHz | 4 GB/s |
| Memory bandwidth | 159.0 GB/s | 128.0 GB/s |
Connectivity and outputs
Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.
| Display Connectors | HDTVTwo Dual Link DVI | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.3a, 1x DisplayPort 1.1 |
| Multi monitor support | + | no data |
| 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.
| High Dynamic-Range Lighting (HDRR) | 128bit | no data |
API compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11.1 (10_0) | 11.2 (11_0) |
| Shader Model | 4.0 | 5.0 |
| OpenGL | 2.1 | 4.4 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | N/A | N/A |
| CUDA | + | - |
Pros & cons summary
| Chip lithography | 55 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 204 Watt | 302 Watt |
GTX 285 has 48% lower power consumption.
ATI HD 5950, on the other hand, has a 37.5% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between GeForce GTX 285 and Radeon HD 5950. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Comparisons with similar GPUs
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
