GeForce GTX 285M SLI vs Quadro M620

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro M620 with GeForce GTX 285M SLI, including specs and performance data.

Quadro M620
2017
2 GB GDDR5, 30 Watt
7.26
+72.4%

Quadro M620 outperforms GTX 285M SLI by an impressive 72% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in performance ranking536681
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2018)G9x (2007−2010)
GPU code nameGM107N10E-GTX
Market segmentMobile workstationLaptop
Release date13 January 2017 (7 years ago)2 March 2009 (15 years ago)

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 cores512256
Core clock speed1018 MHz576 MHz
Number of transistors1,870 million1508 Million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)30 Watt150 Watt
Texture fill rate31.26no data
Floating-point performance1 gflopsno data

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 sizelargelarge
InterfaceMXM-A (3.0)no data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno 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 typeGDDR5GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount2 GB2 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed5012 MHz1020 MHz
Memory bandwidth80 GB/sno 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 ConnectorsNo outputsno data
Display Port1.2no data

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Optimus+-
3D Stereo+no data
Mosaic+no data
nView Display Management+no data
Optimus+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX1210
Shader Model5.1no data
OpenGL4.5no data
OpenCL1.2no data
Vulkan1.1.126-
CUDA5.0+

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.

Quadro M620 7.26
+72.4%
GTX 285M SLI 4.21

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.

Quadro M620 17237
+53.4%
GTX 285M SLI 11233

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 HD25
−128%
57
+128%
4K16
+77.8%
9−10
−77.8%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+71.4%
7−8
−71.4%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18−20
+50%
12−14
−50%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−11
+233%
3−4
−233%
Battlefield 5 21−24
+110%
10−11
−110%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 14−16
+66.7%
9−10
−66.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+71.4%
7−8
−71.4%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+77.8%
9−10
−77.8%
Far Cry New Dawn 20−22
+66.7%
12−14
−66.7%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+92%
24−27
−92%
Hitman 3 14−16
+40%
10−11
−40%
Horizon Zero Dawn 40−45
+53.6%
27−30
−53.6%
Metro Exodus 21−24
+133%
9−10
−133%
Red Dead Redemption 2 20−22
+81.8%
10−12
−81.8%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 24−27
+50%
16−18
−50%
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55
+25.6%
40−45
−25.6%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18−20
+50%
12−14
−50%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−11
+233%
3−4
−233%
Battlefield 5 21−24
+110%
10−11
−110%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 14−16
+66.7%
9−10
−66.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+71.4%
7−8
−71.4%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+77.8%
9−10
−77.8%
Far Cry New Dawn 20−22
+66.7%
12−14
−66.7%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+92%
24−27
−92%
Hitman 3 14−16
+40%
10−11
−40%
Horizon Zero Dawn 40−45
+53.6%
27−30
−53.6%
Metro Exodus 21−24
+133%
9−10
−133%
Red Dead Redemption 2 20−22
+81.8%
10−12
−81.8%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 24−27
+50%
16−18
−50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 62
+288%
16−18
−288%
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55
+25.6%
40−45
−25.6%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18−20
+50%
12−14
−50%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−11
+233%
3−4
−233%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 14−16
+66.7%
9−10
−66.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+71.4%
7−8
−71.4%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+77.8%
9−10
−77.8%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+92%
24−27
−92%
Hitman 3 14−16
+40%
10−11
−40%
Horizon Zero Dawn 40−45
+53.6%
27−30
−53.6%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 24−27
+50%
16−18
−50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10
−60%
16−18
+60%
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55
+25.6%
40−45
−25.6%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 20−22
+81.8%
10−12
−81.8%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
+75%
8−9
−75%
Far Cry New Dawn 10−12
+83.3%
6−7
−83.3%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Far Cry 5 8−9
+60%
5−6
−60%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+333%
6−7
−333%
Hitman 3 10−12
+22.2%
9−10
−22.2%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
+50%
10−11
−50%
Metro Exodus 8−9 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+100%
3−4
−100%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
+76.9%
24−27
−76.9%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+50%
8−9
−50%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 6−7
+100%
3−4
−100%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Hitman 3 3−4 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 24−27
+2300%
1−2
−2300%
Metro Exodus 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Watch Dogs: Legion 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%

This is how Quadro M620 and GTX 285M SLI compete in popular games:

  • GTX 285M SLI is 128% faster in 1080p
  • Quadro M620 is 78% faster in 4K

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

  • in Horizon Zero Dawn, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the Quadro M620 is 2300% faster.
  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GTX 285M SLI is 60% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Quadro M620 is ahead in 64 tests (98%)
  • GTX 285M SLI is ahead in 1 test (2%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 7.26 4.21
Recency 13 January 2017 2 March 2009
Chip lithography 28 nm 55 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 30 Watt 150 Watt

Quadro M620 has a 72.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 96.4% more advanced lithography process, and 400% lower power consumption.

The Quadro M620 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 285M SLI in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro M620 is a mobile workstation card while GeForce GTX 285M SLI is a mobile workstation one.


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

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA Quadro M620
Quadro M620
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 285M SLI
GeForce GTX 285M SLI

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.3 170 votes

Rate Quadro M620 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 4 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 285M SLI on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.