HD Graphics 520 vs GeForce GTX 285M

Place in performance ranking	900	821
Place by popularity	not in top-100	36
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.26	0.18
Architecture	G9x (2007−2010)	Gen. 9 Skylake (2015−2016)
GPU code name	N10E-GTX1	Skylake GT2
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	2 March 2009 (15 years ago)	1 September 2015 (8 years ago)
Current price	$111	$309

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTX 285M has 44% better value for money than HD Graphics 520.

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	128	24
CUDA cores	128	no data
Core clock speed	576 MHz	300 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1050 MHz
Number of transistors	754 million	189 million
Manufacturing process technology	55 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	15 Watt
Texture fill rate	38 billion/sec	25.20
Floating-point performance	384.0 gflops	no data
Gigaflops	576	no data

Form factor & compatibility

Information on GeForce GTX 285M and HD Graphics 520 compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Laptop size	large	no data
Bus support	PCI-E 2.0	no data
Interface	MXM-B (3.0)	PCIe 3.0 x1
SLI options	2-way	no data
MXM Type	MXM 3.0 Type-B	no data

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	DDR3L/LPDDR3/DDR4
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	32 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	64/128 Bit
Memory clock speed	Up to 1020 MHz	System Shared
Memory bandwidth	61 GB/s	no data
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	Single Link DVIVGALVDSHDMIDual Link DVIDisplayPort	No outputs
HDMI	+	no data
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.

Power management	8.0	no data
Quick Sync	no data	+

API compatibility

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

DirectX	11.1 (10_0)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	4.0	6.4
OpenGL	2.1	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	2.1
Vulkan	N/A	+
CUDA	+	no data

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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 285M 1.64

HD Graphics 520 2.15
+31.1%

HD Graphics 520 outperforms GeForce GTX 285M by 31% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

GTX 285M 636

HD Graphics 520 831
+30.7%

HD Graphics 520 outperforms GeForce GTX 285M by 31% in Passmark.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

GTX 285M 6498
+13.6%

HD Graphics 520 5722

GeForce GTX 285M outperforms HD Graphics 520 by 14% in 3DMark Vantage Performance.

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:

900p	21 +5%	20 −5%
Full HD	30 +173%	11 −173%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

4−5

−25%

5−6
+25%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2 −100%	2−3 +100%
Battlefield 5	1−2 −200%	3−4 +200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	10−11 −10%	10−12 +10%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −25%	5−6 +25%
Far Cry 5	0−1	2−3
Forza Horizon 4	2−3 −100%	4−5 +100%
Hitman 3	2−3 −100%	4−5 +100%
Horizon Zero Dawn	2−3 −50%	3−4 +50%
Red Dead Redemption 2	4−5 −25%	5−6 +25%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	7−8 −14.3%	8−9 +14.3%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2 −100%	2−3 +100%
Battlefield 5	1−2 −200%	3−4 +200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	10−11 −10%	10−12 +10%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −25%	5−6 +25%
Far Cry 5	0−1	2−3
Forza Horizon 4	2−3 −100%	4−5 +100%
Hitman 3	2−3 −100%	4−5 +100%
Horizon Zero Dawn	2−3 −50%	3−4 +50%
Metro Exodus	2−3 −50%	3−4 +50%
Red Dead Redemption 2	4−5 −25%	5−6 +25%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	7−8 −14.3%	8−9 +14.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	5−6 +25%	4 −25%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2 −100%	2−3 +100%
Battlefield 5	1−2 −200%	3−4 +200%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −25%	5−6 +25%
Far Cry 5	0−1	2−3
Forza Horizon 4	2−3 −100%	4−5 +100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Hitman 3	4−5 −25%	5−6 +25%
Horizon Zero Dawn	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	0−1	1−2
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	5−6 −20%	6−7 +20%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Far Cry 5	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Hitman 3	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	0−1	1−2

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	0−1	1−2
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	0−1	0−1
Far Cry 5	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%

This is how GTX 285M and HD Graphics 520 compete in popular games:

GTX 285M is 5% faster than HD Graphics 520 in 900p
GTX 285M is 173% faster than HD Graphics 520 in 1080p

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

in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the GTX 285M is 25% faster than the HD Graphics 520.
in Battlefield 5, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the HD Graphics 520 is 200% faster than the GTX 285M.

All in all, in popular games:

GTX 285M is ahead in 1 test (3%)
HD Graphics 520 is ahead in 26 tests (68%)
there's a draw in 11 tests (29%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	1.64	2.15
Recency	2 March 2009	1 September 2015
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	32 GB
Chip lithography	55 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	15 Watt