Radeon R9 285 vs GeForce RTX 3050 4GB Mobile

Place in the ranking	229	317
Place by popularity	52	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	8.67
Power efficiency	28.17	6.30
Architecture	Ampere (2020−2024)	GCN 3.0 (2014−2019)
GPU code name	GN20-P0	Tonga
Market segment	Laptop	Desktop
Release date	11 May 2021 (3 years ago)	2 September 2014 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$249

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	2048	1792
Core clock speed	1238 MHz	918 MHz
Boost clock speed	1500 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	no data	5,000 million
Manufacturing process technology	8 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	60 Watt (35 - 80 Watt TGP)	190 Watt
Texture fill rate	no data	102.8
Floating-point processing power	no data	3.29 TFLOPS
ROPs	no data	32
TMUs	no data	112

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	221 mm
Width	no data	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	2x 6-pin

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	GDDR6	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	2 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	12000 MHz	1375 MHz
Memory bandwidth	no data	176.0 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	2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, 1x DisplayPort 1.2
HDMI	-	+

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12_2	12 (12_0)
Shader Model	no data	6.5
OpenGL	no data	4.6
OpenCL	no data	2.1
Vulkan	-	1.2.170

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.

RTX 3050 4GB Mobile 24.55
+41.3%

R9 285 17.38

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

RTX 3050 4GB Mobile 11949
+39.4%

R9 285 8570

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 HD	64 +42.2%	45−50 −42.2%
1440p	45 +50%	30−35 −50%
4K	29 +61.1%	18−21 −61.1%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	no data	5.53
1440p	no data	8.30
4K	no data	13.83

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	42 +55.6%	27−30 −55.6%
Cyberpunk 2077	66 +46.7%	45−50 −46.7%
Elden Ring	51 +45.7%	35−40 −45.7%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	75−80 +50%	50−55 −50%
Counter-Strike 2	38 +58.3%	24−27 −58.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	46 +53.3%	30−33 −53.3%
Forza Horizon 4	115 +43.8%	80−85 −43.8%
Metro Exodus	83 +50.9%	55−60 −50.9%
Red Dead Redemption 2	87 +45%	60−65 −45%
Valorant	133 +47.8%	90−95 −47.8%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	75−80 +50%	50−55 −50%
Counter-Strike 2	30 +42.9%	21−24 −42.9%
Cyberpunk 2077	37 +54.2%	24−27 −54.2%
Dota 2	96 +47.7%	65−70 −47.7%
Elden Ring	86 +43.3%	60−65 −43.3%
Far Cry 5	73 +46%	50−55 −46%
Fortnite	120−130 +45.9%	85−90 −45.9%
Forza Horizon 4	94 +44.6%	65−70 −44.6%
Grand Theft Auto V	86 +43.3%	60−65 −43.3%
Metro Exodus	57 +42.5%	40−45 −42.5%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	150−160 +55%	100−105 −55%
Red Dead Redemption 2	50−55 +54.3%	35−40 −54.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	75−80 +43.6%	55−60 −43.6%
Valorant	68 +51.1%	45−50 −51.1%
World of Tanks	250−260 +42.2%	180−190 −42.2%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	75−80 +50%	50−55 −50%
Counter-Strike 2	45−50 +50%	30−33 −50%
Cyberpunk 2077	31 +47.6%	21−24 −47.6%
Dota 2	112 +49.3%	75−80 −49.3%
Far Cry 5	75−80 +52%	50−55 −52%
Forza Horizon 4	81 +47.3%	55−60 −47.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	150−160 +55%	100−105 −55%
Valorant	95−100 +41.4%	70−75 −41.4%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	48 +60%	30−33 −60%
Elden Ring	40−45 +43.3%	30−33 −43.3%
Grand Theft Auto V	48 +60%	30−33 −60%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 +45.8%	120−130 −45.8%
Red Dead Redemption 2	21−24 +43.8%	16−18 −43.8%
World of Tanks	160−170 +48.2%	110−120 −48.2%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	45−50 +63.3%	30−33 −63.3%
Counter-Strike 2	21−24 +50%	14−16 −50%
Cyberpunk 2077	17 +41.7%	12−14 −41.7%
Far Cry 5	70−75 +42%	50−55 −42%
Forza Horizon 4	56 +60%	35−40 −60%
Metro Exodus	52 +48.6%	35−40 −48.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	35−40 +50%	24−27 −50%
Valorant	65−70 +46.7%	45−50 −46.7%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	21−24 +57.1%	14−16 −57.1%
Dota 2	44 +46.7%	30−33 −46.7%
Elden Ring	18−20 +58.3%	12−14 −58.3%
Grand Theft Auto V	44 +46.7%	30−33 −46.7%
Metro Exodus	17 +41.7%	12−14 −41.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	75−80 +50%	50−55 −50%
Red Dead Redemption 2	14−16 +50%	10−11 −50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	44 +46.7%	30−33 −46.7%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	24−27 +44.4%	18−20 −44.4%
Counter-Strike 2	21−24 +57.1%	14−16 −57.1%
Cyberpunk 2077	5 +66.7%	3−4 −66.7%
Dota 2	62 +55%	40−45 −55%
Far Cry 5	30−35 +52.4%	21−24 −52.4%
Fortnite	30−33 +42.9%	21−24 −42.9%
Forza Horizon 4	34 +41.7%	24−27 −41.7%
Valorant	30−35 +52.4%	21−24 −52.4%

This is how RTX 3050 4GB Mobile and R9 285 compete in popular games:

RTX 3050 4GB Mobile is 42% faster in 1080p
RTX 3050 4GB Mobile is 50% faster in 1440p
RTX 3050 4GB Mobile is 61% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	24.55	17.38
Recency	11 May 2021	2 September 2014
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	2 GB
Chip lithography	8 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	60 Watt	190 Watt

RTX 3050 4GB Mobile has a 41.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 250% more advanced lithography process, and 216.7% lower power consumption.

The GeForce RTX 3050 4GB Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R9 285 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce RTX 3050 4GB Mobile is a notebook card while Radeon R9 285 is a desktop one.

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