A100X vs Radeon R9 285

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking366not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation7.57no data
Power efficiency6.44no data
ArchitectureGCN 3.0 (2014−2019)Ampere (2020−2025)
GPU code nameTongaGA100
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Release date2 September 2014 (11 years ago)28 June 2021 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$249 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

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 cores17926912
Core clock speed918 MHz795 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1440 MHz
Number of transistors5,000 million54,200 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)190 Watt300 Watt
Texture fill rate102.8622.1
Floating-point processing power3.29 TFLOPS19.91 TFLOPS
ROPs32160
TMUs112432
Tensor Coresno data432
L1 Cache448 KB20.3 MB
L2 Cache512 KB80 MB

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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x8
Length221 mm267 mm
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-pin1x 16-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 typeGDDR5HBM2e
Maximum RAM amount2 GB80 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit5120 Bit
Memory clock speed1375 MHz1593 MHz
Memory bandwidth176.0 GB/s2,039 GB/s
Resizable BAR-+

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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, 1x DisplayPort 1.2No outputs
HDMI+-

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (12_0)N/A
Shader Model6.5N/A
OpenGL4.6N/A
OpenCL2.13.0
Vulkan1.2.170N/A
CUDA-8.0
DLSS-+

Pros & cons summary


Recency 2 September 2014 28 June 2021
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 80 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 190 Watt 300 Watt

R9 285 has 57.9% lower power consumption.

A100X, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 6 years, a 3900% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 300% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Radeon R9 285 and A100X. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon R9 285 is a desktop graphics card while A100X is a workstation one.

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 285
Radeon R9 285
NVIDIA A100X
A100X

Other comparisons

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.


4.2 80 votes

Rate Radeon R9 285 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
5 1 vote

Rate A100X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R9 285 or A100X, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.