GeForce 8800 Ultra vs GTX 485M

Place in the ranking	579	941
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	0.02
Power efficiency	4.27	0.68
Architecture	Fermi (2010−2014)	Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code name	GF104	G80
Market segment	Laptop	Desktop
Release date	5 January 2011 (13 years ago)	2 May 2007 (17 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$829

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	384	612
Core clock speed	1150 MHz	612 MHz
Number of transistors	1,950 million	681 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	90 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	171 Watt
Texture fill rate	36.80	39.17
Floating-point processing power	0.8832 TFLOPS	0.3871 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	24
TMUs	64	32

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
Bus support	PCI-E 2.0	no data
Interface	MXM-B (3.0)	PCIe 1.0 x16
Length	no data	270 mm
Width	no data	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	2x 6-pin
SLI options	+	+

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	GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	512 MB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	384 Bit
Memory clock speed	1500 MHz	1080 MHz
Memory bandwidth	96.0 GB/s	103.7 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 outputs	2x DVI, 1x S-Video
Maximum VGA resolution	2048x1536	no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_0)	11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model	5.1	4.0
OpenGL	4.5	3.3
OpenCL	1.1	1.1
Vulkan	N/A	N/A
CUDA	+	+

Synthetic benchmark performance

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

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark 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 485M 6.12
+269%

8800 Ultra 1.66

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. 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.

GTX 485M 2359
+267%

8800 Ultra 642

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	48 +300%	12−14 −300%
Full HD	66 +313%	16−18 −313%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

no data

51.81

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

10−11

+400%

2−3
−400%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	16−18 +300%	4−5 −300%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	7−8 +600%	1−2 −600%
Battlefield 5	16−18 +325%	4−5 −325%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	12−14 +333%	3−4 −333%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−11 +400%	2−3 −400%
Far Cry 5	12−14 +333%	3−4 −333%
Far Cry New Dawn	16−18 +325%	4−5 −325%
Forza Horizon 4	40−45 +300%	10−11 −300%
Hitman 3	12−14 +300%	3−4 −300%
Horizon Zero Dawn	35−40 +270%	10−11 −270%
Metro Exodus	16−18 +300%	4−5 −300%
Red Dead Redemption 2	16−18 +325%	4−5 −325%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	21−24 +320%	5−6 −320%
Watch Dogs: Legion	50−55 +317%	12−14 −317%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	16−18 +300%	4−5 −300%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	7−8 +600%	1−2 −600%
Battlefield 5	16−18 +325%	4−5 −325%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	12−14 +333%	3−4 −333%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−11 +400%	2−3 −400%
Far Cry 5	12−14 +333%	3−4 −333%
Far Cry New Dawn	16−18 +325%	4−5 −325%
Forza Horizon 4	40−45 +300%	10−11 −300%
Hitman 3	12−14 +300%	3−4 −300%
Horizon Zero Dawn	35−40 +270%	10−11 −270%
Metro Exodus	16−18 +300%	4−5 −300%
Red Dead Redemption 2	16−18 +325%	4−5 −325%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	21−24 +320%	5−6 −320%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	20−22 +300%	5−6 −300%
Watch Dogs: Legion	50−55 +317%	12−14 −317%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	16−18 +300%	4−5 −300%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	7−8 +600%	1−2 −600%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	12−14 +333%	3−4 −333%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−11 +400%	2−3 −400%
Far Cry 5	12−14 +333%	3−4 −333%
Forza Horizon 4	40−45 +300%	10−11 −300%
Hitman 3	12−14 +300%	3−4 −300%
Horizon Zero Dawn	35−40 +270%	10−11 −270%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	21−24 +320%	5−6 −320%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	20−22 +300%	5−6 −300%
Watch Dogs: Legion	50−55 +317%	12−14 −317%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

16−18

+325%

4−5
−325%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	12−14 +300%	3−4 −300%
Far Cry New Dawn	9−10 +350%	2−3 −350%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	6−7 +500%	1−2 −500%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	6−7 +500%	1−2 −500%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4	0−1
Far Cry 5	7−8 +600%	1−2 −600%
Forza Horizon 4	18−20 +350%	4−5 −350%
Hitman 3	10−11 +400%	2−3 −400%
Horizon Zero Dawn	12−14 +333%	3−4 −333%
Metro Exodus	5−6 +400%	1−2 −400%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	2−3	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	5−6 +400%	1−2 −400%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 +290%	10−11 −290%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

10−12

+450%

2−3
−450%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	5−6 +400%	1−2 −400%
Far Cry New Dawn	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Hitman 3	2−3	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	14−16 +275%	4−5 −275%
Metro Exodus	3−4	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	2−3	0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	3−4	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	0−1	0−1
Far Cry 5	3−4	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	6−7 +500%	1−2 −500%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	0−1	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	2−3	0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

6−7
+500%

1−2

−500%

This is how GTX 485M and 8800 Ultra compete in popular games:

GTX 485M is 300% faster in 900p
GTX 485M is 313% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	6.12	1.66
Recency	5 January 2011	2 May 2007
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	512 MB
Chip lithography	40 nm	90 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	171 Watt

GTX 485M has a 268.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 125% more advanced lithography process, and 71% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 485M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 8800 Ultra in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 485M is a notebook card while GeForce 8800 Ultra is a desktop one.

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