Quadro NVS 285 vs Radeon R7 360
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon R7 360 with Quadro NVS 285, including specs and performance data.
R7 360 outperforms NVS 285 by a whopping 6700% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 580 | 1516 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 3.84 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 5.76 | 0.47 |
| Architecture | GCN 2.0 (2013−2017) | Curie (2003−2013) |
| GPU code name | Tobago | NV44 A2 |
| Market segment | Desktop | Workstation |
| Design | reference | no data |
| Release date | 18 June 2015 (10 years ago) | 6 June 2006 (19 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $109 | $27.99 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
Performance to price scatter graph
Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.
Detailed specifications
General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 768 | no data |
| Core clock speed | no data | 275 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1000 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | 2,080 million | 75 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 110 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 100 Watt | 18 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 50.40 | 1.100 |
| Floating-point processing power | 1.613 TFLOPS | no data |
| ROPs | 16 | 2 |
| TMUs | 48 | 4 |
| L1 Cache | 192 KB | no data |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | no 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).
| Bus support | PCIe 3.0 | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 1.0 x16 |
| Length | 165 mm | 168 mm |
| Width | 1-slot | 1-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1 x 6-pin | None |
| Bridgeless CrossFire | + | - |
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 | DDR |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 128 MB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 6000 MHz | 250 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 112 GB/s | 8 GB/s |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
| Display Connectors | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort | 1x DMS-59 |
| Eyefinity | + | - |
| Number of Eyefinity displays | 6 | no data |
| HDMI | + | - |
| DisplayPort support | + | - |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| CrossFire | + | - |
| FreeSync | + | - |
| PowerTune | + | - |
| TrueAudio | + | - |
| VCE | + | - |
| DDMA audio | + | no data |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | DirectX® 12 | 9.0c (9_3) |
| Shader Model | 6.3 | 3.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 2.1 |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | N/A |
| Vulkan | + | N/A |
| Mantle | + | - |
Synthetic benchmarks
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.
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.
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 7.48 | 0.11 |
| Recency | 18 June 2015 | 6 June 2006 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 128 MB |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 110 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 100 Watt | 18 Watt |
R7 360 has a 6700% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 293% more advanced lithography process.
NVS 285, on the other hand, has 456% lower power consumption.
The Radeon R7 360 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro NVS 285 in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon R7 360 is a desktop graphics card while Quadro NVS 285 is a workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
