Radeon R9 M485X vs GeForce GTX 485M SLI
Aggregated performance score
Radeon R9 M485X outperforms GeForce GTX 485M SLI by 3% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in performance ranking | 440 | 431 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 8.50 | 0.55 |
| Architecture | Fermi (2010−2014) | GCN 3 (2014−2016) |
| GPU code name | N11E-GTX-A1 | Amethyst |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 6 January 2011 (13 years ago) | 14 May 2016 (7 years ago) |
| Current price | $149 | $2500 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
GTX 485M SLI has 1445% better value for money than R9 M485X.
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 | 768 | 2048 |
| Core clock speed | 575 MHz | 723 MHz |
| Number of transistors | no data | 5,000 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 100 Watt | 250 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 92.54 |
| Floating-point performance | no data | 2,961 gflops |
Form factor & compatibility
Information on GeForce GTX 485M SLI and Radeon R9 M485X 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 | large |
| Interface | no data | MXM-B (3.0) |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | None |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2x2 GB | 8 GB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1500 MHz | 5000 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 160.0 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 | No outputs |
API compatibility
List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11 | 12 (12_0) |
| Shader Model | no data | 6.3 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | no data | 2.0 |
| Vulkan | no data | 1.2.131 |
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 | 89
−1.1%
| 90−95
+1.1%
|
| Full HD | 103
+3%
| 100−110
−3%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 14−16
−7.1%
|
14−16
+7.1%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 18−20
−5.3%
|
20−22
+5.3%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 12−14
−7.7%
|
14−16
+7.7%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 30−35
−3.2%
|
30−35
+3.2%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 24−27
+0%
|
24−27
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 14−16
−7.1%
|
14−16
+7.1%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 21−24
+0%
|
21−24
+0%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 24−27
−4.2%
|
24−27
+4.2%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 30−35
−3.1%
|
30−35
+3.1%
|
| Hitman 3 | 21−24
−4.3%
|
24−27
+4.3%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 18−20
+0%
|
18−20
+0%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 16−18
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 20−22
+0%
|
20−22
+0%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 16−18
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 18−20
−5.3%
|
20−22
+5.3%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 12−14
−7.7%
|
14−16
+7.7%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 30−35
−3.2%
|
30−35
+3.2%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 24−27
+0%
|
24−27
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 14−16
−7.1%
|
14−16
+7.1%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 21−24
+0%
|
21−24
+0%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 24−27
−4.2%
|
24−27
+4.2%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 30−35
−3.1%
|
30−35
+3.1%
|
| Hitman 3 | 21−24
−4.3%
|
24−27
+4.3%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 18−20
+0%
|
18−20
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 16−18
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 20−22
+0%
|
20−22
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 18−20
+0%
|
18−20
+0%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 16−18
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 18−20
−5.3%
|
20−22
+5.3%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 12−14
−7.7%
|
14−16
+7.7%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 30−35
−3.2%
|
30−35
+3.2%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 14−16
−7.1%
|
14−16
+7.1%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 21−24
+0%
|
21−24
+0%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 24−27
−4.2%
|
24−27
+4.2%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 30−35
−3.1%
|
30−35
+3.1%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 18−20
+0%
|
18−20
+0%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 16−18
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 12−14
−7.7%
|
14−16
+7.7%
|
| Hitman 3 | 14−16
−7.1%
|
14−16
+7.1%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 7−8
−14.3%
|
8−9
+14.3%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 6−7
−16.7%
|
7−8
+16.7%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 12−14
+0%
|
12−14
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 8−9
−12.5%
|
9−10
+12.5%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 14−16
−7.1%
|
14−16
+7.1%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 14−16
−7.1%
|
14−16
+7.1%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 14−16
−7.1%
|
14−16
+7.1%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 16−18
−6.3%
|
16−18
+6.3%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 8−9
−12.5%
|
9−10
+12.5%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
4K
High Preset
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 6−7
+0%
|
6−7
+0%
|
| Hitman 3 | 8−9
−12.5%
|
9−10
+12.5%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 4−5
−25%
|
5−6
+25%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 7−8
−14.3%
|
8−9
+14.3%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−12
+0%
|
10−12
+0%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
This is how GTX 485M SLI and R9 M485X compete in popular games:
- R9 M485X is 1.1% faster than GTX 485M SLI in 900p
- GTX 485M SLI is 3% faster than R9 M485X in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Shadow of the Tomb Raider, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the R9 M485X is 25% faster than the GTX 485M SLI.
All in all, in popular games:
- R9 M485X is ahead in 34 tests (50%)
- there's a draw in 34 tests (50%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 9.20 | 9.46 |
| Recency | 6 January 2011 | 14 May 2016 |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 100 Watt | 250 Watt |
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between GeForce GTX 485M SLI and Radeon R9 M485X.
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.
