GeForce 8800M GTX SLI vs GTX 285M SLI
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce GTX 285M SLI and GeForce 8800M GTX SLI, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
GTX 285M SLI outperforms 8800M GTX SLI by a whopping 102% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
Place in the ranking | 688 | 881 |
Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
Power efficiency | 1.89 | 1.08 |
Architecture | G9x (2007−2010) | G9x (2007−2010) |
GPU code name | N10E-GTX | NB8E-GTX |
Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
Release date | 2 March 2009 (15 years ago) | 19 November 2007 (17 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. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
Pipelines / CUDA cores | 256 | 192 |
Core clock speed | 576 MHz | 500 MHz |
Number of transistors | 1508 Million | 1508 Million |
Manufacturing process technology | 55 nm | 65 nm |
Power consumption (TDP) | 150 Watt | 130 Watt |
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 | large |
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 | 2 GB | 512 MB |
Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 256 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 1020 MHz | 800 MHz |
Shared memory | - | - |
API compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
DirectX | 10 | 10 |
CUDA | + | - |
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.
3DMark Vantage Performance
3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.
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 | 60
+122%
| 27−30
−122%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
Cyberpunk 2077 | 7−8
+75%
|
4−5
−75%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 12−14
+71.4%
|
7−8
−71.4%
|
Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
Battlefield 5 | 10−11
+900%
|
1−2
−900%
|
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 9−10
+80%
|
5−6
−80%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 7−8
+75%
|
4−5
−75%
|
Far Cry 5 | 9−10
+200%
|
3−4
−200%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 12−14
+140%
|
5−6
−140%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 24−27
+213%
|
8−9
−213%
|
Hitman 3 | 10−11
+42.9%
|
7−8
−42.9%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 27−30
+55.6%
|
18−20
−55.6%
|
Metro Exodus | 9−10
+125%
|
4−5
−125%
|
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 10−12
+175%
|
4−5
−175%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 16−18
+60%
|
10−11
−60%
|
Watch Dogs: Legion | 40−45
+22.9%
|
35−40
−22.9%
|
Full HD
High Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 12−14
+71.4%
|
7−8
−71.4%
|
Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
Battlefield 5 | 10−11
+900%
|
1−2
−900%
|
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 9−10
+80%
|
5−6
−80%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 7−8
+75%
|
4−5
−75%
|
Far Cry 5 | 9−10
+200%
|
3−4
−200%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 12−14
+140%
|
5−6
−140%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 24−27
+213%
|
8−9
−213%
|
Hitman 3 | 10−11
+42.9%
|
7−8
−42.9%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 27−30
+55.6%
|
18−20
−55.6%
|
Metro Exodus | 9−10
+125%
|
4−5
−125%
|
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 10−12
+175%
|
4−5
−175%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 16−18
+60%
|
10−11
−60%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 16−18
+33.3%
|
12−14
−33.3%
|
Watch Dogs: Legion | 40−45
+22.9%
|
35−40
−22.9%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 12−14
+71.4%
|
7−8
−71.4%
|
Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 9−10
+80%
|
5−6
−80%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 7−8
+75%
|
4−5
−75%
|
Far Cry 5 | 9−10
+200%
|
3−4
−200%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 24−27
+213%
|
8−9
−213%
|
Hitman 3 | 10−11
+42.9%
|
7−8
−42.9%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 27−30
+55.6%
|
18−20
−55.6%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 16−18
+60%
|
10−11
−60%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 16−18
+33.3%
|
12−14
−33.3%
|
Watch Dogs: Legion | 40−45
+22.9%
|
35−40
−22.9%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 10−12
+175%
|
4−5
−175%
|
1440p
High Preset
Battlefield 5 | 8−9
+167%
|
3−4
−167%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 6−7
+100%
|
3−4
−100%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 4−5
+100%
|
2−3
−100%
|
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
Far Cry 5 | 5−6
+150%
|
2−3
−150%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
+200%
|
2−3
−200%
|
Hitman 3 | 9−10
+28.6%
|
7−8
−28.6%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 10−11
+66.7%
|
6−7
−66.7%
|
Metro Exodus | 0−1 | 0−1 |
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
Watch Dogs: Legion | 24−27
+136%
|
10−12
−136%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 8−9
+60%
|
5−6
−60%
|
4K
High Preset
Battlefield 5 | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
Hitman 3 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
Horizon Zero Dawn | 1−2 | 0−1 |
Metro Exodus | 1−2 | 0−1 |
4K
Ultra Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 3−4
+50%
|
2−3
−50%
|
Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 2−3 | 0−1 |
Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
Far Cry 5 | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
Watch Dogs: Legion | 1−2 | 0−1 |
4K
Epic Preset
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 5−6
+66.7%
|
3−4
−66.7%
|
This is how GTX 285M SLI and 8800M GTX SLI compete in popular games:
- GTX 285M SLI is 122% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Battlefield 5, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the GTX 285M SLI is 900% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Without exception, GTX 285M SLI surpassed 8800M GTX SLI in all 53 of our tests.
Pros & cons summary
Performance score | 4.14 | 2.05 |
Recency | 2 March 2009 | 19 November 2007 |
Chip lithography | 55 nm | 65 nm |
Power consumption (TDP) | 150 Watt | 130 Watt |
GTX 285M SLI has a 102% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, and a 18.2% more advanced lithography process.
8800M GTX SLI, on the other hand, has 15.4% lower power consumption.
The GeForce GTX 285M SLI is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 8800M GTX SLI in performance tests.
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.