TITAN RTX vs GeForce GTX 285

Place in the ranking	696	63
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.27	2.10
Power efficiency	1.34	12.17
Architecture	Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)	Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code name	GT200B	TU102
Market segment	Desktop	Desktop
Release date	23 December 2008 (15 years ago)	18 December 2018 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$359	$2,499

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

TITAN RTX has 678% better value for money than GTX 285.

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	4608
Core clock speed	648 MHz	1350 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1770 MHz
Number of transistors	1,400 million	18,600 million
Manufacturing process technology	55 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	204 Watt	280 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature	105 °C	no data
Texture fill rate	51.84	509.8
Floating-point processing power	0.7085 TFLOPS	16.31 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	96
TMUs	80	288
Tensor Cores	no data	576
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	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 3.0 x16
Length	267 mm	267 mm
Height	4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)	no data
Width	2-slot	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	2x 6-pin	2x 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	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	24 GB
Memory bus width	512 Bit	384 Bit
Memory clock speed	1242 MHz	1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth	159.0 GB/s	672.0 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	1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort, 1x USB Type-C
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)	12 Ultimate (12_1)
Shader Model	4.0	6.5
OpenGL	2.1	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	2.0
Vulkan	N/A	1.2.131
CUDA	+	7.5

Synthetic benchmark performance

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

GTX 285 3.92

TITAN RTX 48.88
+1147%

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.

GTX 285 1513

TITAN RTX 18858
+1146%

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	12−14 −1250%	162 +1250%
1440p	7−8 −1314%	99 +1314%
4K	5−6 −1360%	73 +1360%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	29.92	15.43
1440p	51.29	25.24
4K	71.80	34.23

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	104 +0%	104 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	104 +0%	104 +0%
Battlefield 5	209 +0%	209 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	143 +0%	143 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	79 +0%	79 +0%
Far Cry 5	127 +0%	127 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	201 +0%	201 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	281 +0%	281 +0%
Hitman 3	117 +0%	117 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	348 +0%	348 +0%
Metro Exodus	144 +0%	144 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	127 +0%	127 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	206 +0%	206 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	215 +0%	215 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	186 +0%	186 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	88 +0%	88 +0%
Battlefield 5	203 +0%	203 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	131 +0%	131 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	79 +0%	79 +0%
Far Cry 5	101 +0%	101 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	154 +0%	154 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	254 +0%	254 +0%
Hitman 3	116 +0%	116 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	336 +0%	336 +0%
Metro Exodus	144 +0%	144 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	110 +0%	110 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	286 +0%	286 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	204 +0%	204 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	79 +0%	79 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	80 +0%	80 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	102 +0%	102 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	78 +0%	78 +0%
Far Cry 5	79 +0%	79 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	175 +0%	175 +0%
Hitman 3	111 +0%	111 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	218 +0%	218 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	242 +0%	242 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	139 +0%	139 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	86 +0%	86 +0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

123

+0%

123

+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	95−100 +0%	95−100 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	75−80 +0%	75−80 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	66 +0%	66 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	79 +0%	79 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	66 +0%	66 +0%
Far Cry 5	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	250−260 +0%	250−260 +0%
Hitman 3	100 +0%	100 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	168 +0%	168 +0%
Metro Exodus	114 +0%	114 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	183 +0%	183 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	75−80 +0%	75−80 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	205 +0%	205 +0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

119

+0%

119

+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	88 +0%	88 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	67 +0%	67 +0%
Hitman 3	48 +0%	48 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	150 +0%	150 +0%
Metro Exodus	121 +0%	121 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	103 +0%	103 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	52 +0%	52 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	43 +0%	43 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	50 +0%	50 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	33 +0%	33 +0%
Far Cry 5	49 +0%	49 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	114 +0%	114 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	109 +0%	109 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	43 +0%	43 +0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

+0%

This is how GTX 285 and TITAN RTX compete in popular games:

TITAN RTX is 1250% faster in 1080p
TITAN RTX is 1314% faster in 1440p
TITAN RTX is 1360% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 72 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	3.92	48.88
Recency	23 December 2008	18 December 2018
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	24 GB
Chip lithography	55 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	204 Watt	280 Watt

GTX 285 has 37.3% lower power consumption.

TITAN RTX, on the other hand, has a 1146.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, a 2300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 358.3% more advanced lithography process.

The TITAN RTX is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 285 in performance tests.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.