Tesla P4 vs GeForce GTX 485M SLI

Place in the ranking	471	238
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	6.77	22.48
Architecture	Fermi (2010−2014)	Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code name	N11E-GTX-A1	GP104
Market segment	Laptop	Workstation
Release date	6 January 2011 (13 years ago)	13 September 2016 (8 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	768	2560
Core clock speed	575 MHz	886 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1114 MHz
Number of transistors	no data	7,200 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	16 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	75 Watt
Texture fill rate	no data	178.2
Floating-point processing power	no data	5.704 TFLOPS
ROPs	no data	64
TMUs	no data	160

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	168 mm
Width	no data	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	None

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	GDDR5	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	2x2 GB	8 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	1500 MHz	1502 MHz
Memory bandwidth	no data	192.3 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 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX	11	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	no data	6.4
OpenGL	no data	4.6
OpenCL	no data	1.2
Vulkan	-	1.2.131
CUDA	-	6.1

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 −147%	220−230 +147%
Full HD	104 −140%	250−260 +140%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

14−16

−114%

30−33
+114%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	21−24 −127%	50−55 +127%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	12−14 −131%	30−33 +131%
Battlefield 5	27−30 −132%	65−70 +132%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	18−20 −137%	45−50 +137%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 −114%	30−33 +114%
Far Cry 5	21−24 −138%	50−55 +138%
Far Cry New Dawn	24−27 −131%	60−65 +131%
Forza Horizon 4	60−65 −146%	150−160 +146%
Hitman 3	18−20 −122%	40−45 +122%
Horizon Zero Dawn	50−55 −135%	120−130 +135%
Metro Exodus	27−30 −141%	70−75 +141%
Red Dead Redemption 2	24−27 −131%	60−65 +131%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	30−33 −133%	70−75 +133%
Watch Dogs: Legion	60−65 −146%	150−160 +146%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	21−24 −127%	50−55 +127%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	12−14 −131%	30−33 +131%
Battlefield 5	27−30 −132%	65−70 +132%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	18−20 −137%	45−50 +137%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 −114%	30−33 +114%
Far Cry 5	21−24 −138%	50−55 +138%
Far Cry New Dawn	24−27 −131%	60−65 +131%
Forza Horizon 4	60−65 −146%	150−160 +146%
Hitman 3	18−20 −122%	40−45 +122%
Horizon Zero Dawn	50−55 −135%	120−130 +135%
Metro Exodus	27−30 −141%	70−75 +141%
Red Dead Redemption 2	24−27 −131%	60−65 +131%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	30−33 −133%	70−75 +133%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	24−27 −140%	60−65 +140%
Watch Dogs: Legion	60−65 −146%	150−160 +146%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	21−24 −127%	50−55 +127%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	12−14 −131%	30−33 +131%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	18−20 −137%	45−50 +137%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 −114%	30−33 +114%
Far Cry 5	21−24 −138%	50−55 +138%
Forza Horizon 4	60−65 −146%	150−160 +146%
Hitman 3	18−20 −122%	40−45 +122%
Horizon Zero Dawn	50−55 −135%	120−130 +135%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	30−33 −133%	70−75 +133%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	24−27 −140%	60−65 +140%
Watch Dogs: Legion	60−65 −146%	150−160 +146%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

24−27

−131%

60−65
+131%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	18−20 −122%	40−45 +122%
Far Cry New Dawn	14−16 −114%	30−33 +114%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	9−10 −133%	21−24 +133%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	5−6 −140%	12−14 +140%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	9−10 −133%	21−24 +133%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −125%	9−10 +125%
Far Cry 5	10−12 −145%	27−30 +145%
Forza Horizon 4	35−40 −144%	95−100 +144%
Hitman 3	12−14 −125%	27−30 +125%
Horizon Zero Dawn	18−20 −137%	45−50 +137%
Metro Exodus	12−14 −131%	30−33 +131%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	10−12 −145%	27−30 +145%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	9−10 −133%	21−24 +133%
Watch Dogs: Legion	55−60 −137%	140−150 +137%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

14−16

−133%

35−40
+133%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	8−9 −125%	18−20 +125%
Far Cry New Dawn	6−7 −133%	14−16 +133%
Hitman 3	5−6 −140%	12−14 +140%
Horizon Zero Dawn	35−40 −143%	90−95 +143%
Metro Exodus	7−8 −129%	16−18 +129%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	6−7 −133%	14−16 +133%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	5−6 −140%	12−14 +140%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	4−5 −125%	9−10 +125%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 −125%	9−10 +125%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −100%	2−3 +100%
Far Cry 5	5−6 −140%	12−14 +140%
Forza Horizon 4	10−12 −145%	27−30 +145%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	5−6 −140%	12−14 +140%
Watch Dogs: Legion	3−4 −133%	7−8 +133%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

9−10
−133%

21−24

+133%

This is how GTX 485M SLI and Tesla P4 compete in popular games:

Tesla P4 is 147% faster in 900p
Tesla P4 is 140% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	9.24	23.02
Recency	6 January 2011	13 September 2016
Chip lithography	40 nm	16 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	75 Watt

Tesla P4 has a 149.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 150% more advanced lithography process, and 33.3% lower power consumption.

The Tesla P4 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 485M SLI in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 485M SLI is a notebook card while Tesla P4 is a workstation one.

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