GeForce GT 630 OEM vs Radeon R9 285

Aggregated performance score

R9 285
2014
2 GB GDDR5
17.25
+939%

Radeon R9 285 outperforms GeForce GT 630 OEM by 939% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

General info

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

Place in performance ranking294896
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Value for money16.150.02
ArchitectureGCN 3.0 (2014−2017)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameTongaGK107
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date2 September 2014 (9 years ago)24 April 2012 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$249 no data
Current price$85 (0.3x MSRP)$429

Value for money

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

R9 285 has 80650% better value for money than GT 630 OEM.

Technical specs

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 cores1792192
Core clock speed918 MHz875 MHz
Number of transistors5,000 million1,270 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)190 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate102.814.00
Floating-point performance3,290 gflops336.0 gflops

Size and 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 3.0 x16
Length221 mm145 mm
Width2-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-pinNone

Memory

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 typeGDDR5DDR3
Maximum RAM amount2 GB1 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed5.5 GB/s1782 MHz
Memory bandwidth176.0 GB/s28.51 GB/s

Video outputs and ports

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 1.4a, 1x DisplayPort 1.21x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA
HDMI++

API support

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

DirectX12 (12_0)12 (11_0)
Shader Model6.55.1
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.11.2
Vulkan1.2.1701.1.126
CUDAno data3.0

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Advantages and disadvantages


Performance score 17.25 1.66
Recency 2 September 2014 24 April 2012
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 1 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 190 Watt 50 Watt

The Radeon R9 285 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 630 OEM in performance tests.


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

Vote

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 GeForce GT 630 OEM
GeForce GT 630 OEM

Similar GPU comparisons

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

User Ratings

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


4.2 74 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 26 votes

Rate GeForce GT 630 OEM on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions and comments

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