Quadro RTX 8000 vs GeForce GTX 285M SLI

Place in the ranking	685	60
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	1.87
Power efficiency	1.92	13.36
Architecture	G9x (2007−2010)	Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code name	N10E-GTX	TU102
Market segment	Laptop	Workstation
Release date	2 March 2009 (15 years ago)	13 August 2018 (6 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$9,999

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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	4608
Core clock speed	576 MHz	1395 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1770 MHz
Number of transistors	1508 Million	18,600 million
Manufacturing process technology	55 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	150 Watt	260 Watt
Texture fill rate	no data	509.8
Floating-point processing power	no data	16.31 TFLOPS
ROPs	no data	96
TMUs	no data	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).

Laptop size	large	no data
Interface	no data	PCIe 3.0 x16
Length	no data	267 mm
Width	no data	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	1x 6-pin + 1x 8-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 type	GDDR3	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	48 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	384 Bit
Memory clock speed	1020 MHz	1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth	no data	672.0 GB/s
Shared memory	-	-

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

no data

4x DisplayPort, 1x USB Type-C

API compatibility

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

DirectX	10	12 Ultimate (12_1)
Shader Model	no data	6.5
OpenGL	no data	4.6
OpenCL	no data	2.0
Vulkan	-	1.2.131
CUDA	+	7.5

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

−1067%

700−750
+1067%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

no data

14.28

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

7−8

−1043%

80−85
+1043%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	12−14 −1067%	140−150 +1067%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	3−4 −1067%	35−40 +1067%
Battlefield 5	10−11 −1100%	120−130 +1100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	9−10 −1011%	100−105 +1011%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 −1043%	80−85 +1043%
Far Cry 5	9−10 −1011%	100−105 +1011%
Far Cry New Dawn	12−14 −1067%	140−150 +1067%
Forza Horizon 4	24−27 −1100%	300−310 +1100%
Hitman 3	10−11 −1100%	120−130 +1100%
Horizon Zero Dawn	27−30 −971%	300−310 +971%
Metro Exodus	9−10 −1011%	100−105 +1011%
Red Dead Redemption 2	10−12 −1082%	130−140 +1082%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	16−18 −1088%	190−200 +1088%
Watch Dogs: Legion	40−45 −1063%	500−550 +1063%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	12−14 −1067%	140−150 +1067%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	3−4 −1067%	35−40 +1067%
Battlefield 5	10−11 −1100%	120−130 +1100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	9−10 −1011%	100−105 +1011%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 −1043%	80−85 +1043%
Far Cry 5	9−10 −1011%	100−105 +1011%
Far Cry New Dawn	12−14 −1067%	140−150 +1067%
Forza Horizon 4	24−27 −1100%	300−310 +1100%
Hitman 3	10−11 −1100%	120−130 +1100%
Horizon Zero Dawn	27−30 −971%	300−310 +971%
Metro Exodus	9−10 −1011%	100−105 +1011%
Red Dead Redemption 2	10−12 −1082%	130−140 +1082%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	16−18 −1088%	190−200 +1088%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 −1088%	190−200 +1088%
Watch Dogs: Legion	40−45 −1063%	500−550 +1063%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	12−14 −1067%	140−150 +1067%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	3−4 −1067%	35−40 +1067%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	9−10 −1011%	100−105 +1011%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 −1043%	80−85 +1043%
Far Cry 5	9−10 −1011%	100−105 +1011%
Forza Horizon 4	24−27 −1100%	300−310 +1100%
Hitman 3	10−11 −1100%	120−130 +1100%
Horizon Zero Dawn	27−30 −971%	300−310 +971%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	16−18 −1088%	190−200 +1088%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 −1088%	190−200 +1088%
Watch Dogs: Legion	40−45 −1063%	500−550 +1063%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

10−12

−1082%

130−140
+1082%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	8−9 −1088%	95−100 +1088%
Far Cry New Dawn	6−7 −1067%	70−75 +1067%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 −1025%	45−50 +1025%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 −1067%	35−40 +1067%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −1100%	24−27 +1100%
Far Cry 5	5−6 −1100%	60−65 +1100%
Forza Horizon 4	6−7 −1067%	70−75 +1067%
Hitman 3	9−10 −1011%	100−105 +1011%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−11 −1100%	120−130 +1100%
Metro Exodus	0−1	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	3−4 −1067%	35−40 +1067%
Watch Dogs: Legion	24−27 −1054%	300−310 +1054%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

8−9

−1088%

95−100
+1088%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	3−4 −1067%	35−40 +1067%
Far Cry New Dawn	3−4 −1067%	35−40 +1067%
Hitman 3	0−1	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	1−2 −1100%	12−14 +1100%
Metro Exodus	1−2 −1100%	12−14 +1100%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4 −1067%	35−40 +1067%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	2−3 −1100%	24−27 +1100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 −1100%	24−27 +1100%
Cyberpunk 2077	0−1	0−1
Far Cry 5	2−3 −1100%	24−27 +1100%
Forza Horizon 4	3−4 −1067%	35−40 +1067%
Watch Dogs: Legion	1−2 −1100%	12−14 +1100%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

5−6

−1100%

60−65
+1100%

This is how GTX 285M SLI and RTX 8000 compete in popular games:

RTX 8000 is 1067% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	4.14	49.97
Recency	2 March 2009	13 August 2018
Chip lithography	55 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	150 Watt	260 Watt

GTX 285M SLI has 73.3% lower power consumption.

RTX 8000, on the other hand, has a 1107% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, and a 358.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro RTX 8000 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 285M SLI in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 285M SLI is a notebook card while Quadro RTX 8000 is a workstation one.

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