Quadro NVS 285 vs Radeon R9 270

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking420not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation4.88no data
Power efficiency5.19no data
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)Curie (2003−2013)
GPU code nameCuracaoNV44 A2
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Designreferenceno data
Release date13 November 2013 (11 years ago)6 June 2006 (18 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$179 $27.99

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 cores1280no data
Core clock speedno data275 MHz
Boost clock speed925 MHzno data
Number of transistors2,800 million75 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm110 nm
Power consumption (TDP)150 Watt18 Watt
Texture fill rate74.001.100
Floating-point processing power2.368 TFLOPSno data
ROPs322
TMUs804

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 supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 1.0 x16
Length210 mm168 mm
Width2-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectors1 x 6-pinNone

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 typeGDDR5DDR
Maximum RAM amount2 GB128 MB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speedno data250 MHz
Memory bandwidth179.2 GB/s8 GB/s

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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort1x DMS-59
Eyefinity+-
HDMI+-
DisplayPort support+-

Supported technologies

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

CrossFire+-
FreeSync+-
HD3D+-
LiquidVR+-
TressFX+-
TrueAudio+-
UVD+-
DDMA audio+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 129.0c (9_3)
Shader Model5.13.0
OpenGL4.62.1
OpenCL1.2N/A
Vulkan+N/A

Synthetic benchmark performance

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



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.

R9 270 4306
+10152%
NVS 285 42

Pros & cons summary


Recency 13 November 2013 6 June 2006
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 128 MB
Chip lithography 28 nm 110 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 150 Watt 18 Watt

R9 270 has an age advantage of 7 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 292.9% more advanced lithography process.

NVS 285, on the other hand, has 733.3% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Radeon R9 270 and Quadro NVS 285. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon R9 270 is a desktop card while Quadro NVS 285 is a 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.


AMD Radeon R9 270
Radeon R9 270
NVIDIA Quadro NVS 285
Quadro NVS 285

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.


3.9 598 votes

Rate Radeon R9 270 on a scale of 1 to 5:

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

Rate Quadro NVS 285 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.