Radeon HD 8410G vs GeForce GTX 285M SLI

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
260M 260M SLI 280M 280M SLI 285M 285M SLI
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
8180 8210 8210E 8240 Mobile IGP 8250 8280 Mobile IGP 8280E 8310E 8310G 8330 Mobile IGP 8330E 8350G 8400 Mobile IGP 8400E 8410G 8450G 8450G + Radeon HD 8570M Dual Graphics 8510G 8530M 8550G 8550G + HD 8670M Dual Graphics 8550G + HD 8750M Dual Graphics 8550M 8570A 8570M 8590M 8610G 8610G IGP 8650G 8650G + HD 8570M Dual Graphics 8650G + HD 8670M Dual Graphics 8650M 8670A 8670M 8690M 8730A 8730M 8750A 8750M 8770M 8790M 8830M 8850M 8870M 8950M 8970M 8970M Crossfire

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 285M SLI and Radeon HD 8410G, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTX 285M SLI
2009
2 GB GDDR3, 150 Watt
3.81
+266%

285M SLI outperforms HD 8410G by a whopping 266% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Share:
GTX 285M SLI GTX 285M SLI
HD 8410G HD 8410G

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking7611147
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency1.962.29
ArchitectureG9x (2007−2010)TeraScale 3 (2010−2013)
GPU code nameN10E-GTXScrapper
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date2 March 2009 (17 years ago)23 May 2013 (12 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 cores256192
Core clock speed576 MHz600 MHz
Boost clock speedno data720 MHz
Number of transistors1508 Million1,303 million
Manufacturing process technology55 nm32 nm
Power consumption (TDP)150 Watt35 Watt
Texture fill rateno data8.640
Floating-point processing powerno data0.2765 TFLOPS
ROPsno data4
TMUsno data12

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 sizelargeno data
Interfaceno dataIGP

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 typeGDDR3System Shared
Maximum RAM amount2 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width256 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1020 MHzSystem Shared
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 Connectorsno dataNo outputs

API and SDK support

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

DirectX1011.2 (11_0)
Shader Modelno data5.0
OpenGLno data4.4
OpenCLno data1.2
Vulkan-N/A
CUDA+-

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 HD60
+275%
16−18
−275%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+275%
4−5
−275%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 14−16
+275%
4−5
−275%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+275%
4−5
−275%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+450%
2−3
−450%
Fortnite 21−24
+1000%
2−3
−1000%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+157%
7−8
−157%
Forza Horizon 5 10−11
+900%
1−2
−900%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+77.8%
9−10
−77.8%
Valorant 50−55
+65.6%
30−35
−65.6%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 14−16
+275%
4−5
−275%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+275%
4−5
−275%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 65−70
+165%
24−27
−165%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%
Dota 2 35−40
+133%
14−16
−133%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+450%
2−3
−450%
Fortnite 21−24
+1000%
2−3
−1000%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+157%
7−8
−157%
Forza Horizon 5 10−11
+900%
1−2
−900%
Grand Theft Auto V 12−14
+300%
3−4
−300%
Metro Exodus 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+77.8%
9−10
−77.8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+100%
6−7
−100%
Valorant 50−55
+65.6%
30−35
−65.6%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 14−16
+275%
4−5
−275%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%
Dota 2 35−40
+133%
14−16
−133%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+450%
2−3
−450%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+157%
7−8
−157%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+77.8%
9−10
−77.8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+100%
6−7
−100%
Valorant 50−55
+65.6%
30−35
−65.6%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 21−24
+1000%
2−3
−1000%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+100%
4−5
−100%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 27−30
+383%
6−7
−383%
Grand Theft Auto V 2−3 0−1
Metro Exodus 2−3 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+191%
10−12
−191%
Valorant 40−45 0−1

1440p
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4 0−1
Far Cry 5 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+200%
3−4
−200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+7.1%
14−16
−7.1%
Valorant 18−20
+280%
5−6
−280%

4K
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Dota 2 12−14
+300%
3−4
−300%
Far Cry 5 3−4 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%

This is how GTX 285M SLI and HD 8410G compete in popular games:

  • GTX 285M SLI is 275% faster in 1080p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Fortnite, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the GTX 285M SLI is 1000% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, GTX 285M SLI surpassed HD 8410G in all 38 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 3.81 1.04
Recency 2 March 2009 23 May 2013
Chip lithography 55 nm 32 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 150 Watt 35 Watt

GTX 285M SLI has a 266% higher aggregate performance score.

HD 8410G, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 4 years, a 72% more advanced lithography process, and 329% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 285M SLI is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 8410G in performance tests.

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

GTX 285M SLI GeForce GTX 285M SLI
vs
RX 5700M Radeon RX 5700M
HD 8410G Radeon HD 8410G
vs
GT 720M GeForce GT 720M
GTX 285M SLI GeForce GTX 285M SLI
vs
R9 M370X Radeon R9 M370X
HD 6790 HD 6790
vs
RX 580X Mobile RX 580X Mobile
HD 6790 HD 6790
vs
RX 5300 XT RX 5300 XT
HD 6790 HD 6790
vs
UHD Graphics 750 UHD Graphics 750
GTX 285M SLI GTX 285M SLI
vs
R5 M320 R5 M320
GTX 285M SLI GTX 285M SLI
vs
R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L) R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L)
GTX 285M SLI 285M SLI
vs
GTX 280M 280M
GTX 285M SLI GTX 285M SLI
vs
9800M GT SLI 9800M GT SLI
GTX 285M SLI GTX 285M SLI
vs
Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 3600 Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 3600
GTX 285M SLI GTX 285M SLI
vs
Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 3150 Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 3150
GTX 285M SLI GTX 285M SLI
vs
HD Graphics 405 HD Graphics 405

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.

3 4 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 285M SLI on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate Radeon HD 8410G on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GTX 285M SLI or Radeon HD 8410G, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.