GeForce GTX 550 Ti vs Radeon R9 285

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 285 and GeForce GTX 550 Ti, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

R9 285
2014, $249
2 GB GDDR5, 190 Watt
15.96
+329%

R9 285 outperforms 550 Ti by a whopping 329% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking365760
Place by popularitynot in top-10073
Cost-effectiveness evaluation7.670.69
Power efficiency6.452.46
ArchitectureGCN 3.0 (2014−2019)Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)
GPU code nameTongaGF116
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date2 September 2014 (11 years ago)15 March 2011 (14 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$249 $149

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

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

R9 285 has 1012% better value for money than GTX 550 Ti.

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 cores1792192
Core clock speed918 MHz900 MHz
Number of transistors5,000 million1,170 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)190 Watt116 Watt
Maximum GPU temperatureno data100 °C
Texture fill rate102.828.80
Floating-point processing power3.29 TFLOPS0.6912 TFLOPS
ROPs3224
TMUs11232
L1 Cache448 KB256 KB
L2 Cache512 KB384 KB

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 supportno data16x PCI-E 2.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length221 mm210 mm
Heightno data4.376" (11.1 cm)
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-pin1x 6-pin
SLI options-+

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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount2 GB2 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit192 Bit
Memory clock speed1375 MHz4.1 GB/s
Memory bandwidth176.0 GB/s98.4 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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, 1x DisplayPort 1.2Two Dual Link DVI-IMini HDMI
Multi monitor supportno data+
HDMI++
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536
Audio input for HDMIno dataInternal

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (12_0)12 (11_0)
Shader Model6.55.1
OpenGL4.64.2
OpenCL2.11.1
Vulkan1.2.170N/A
CUDA-+

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.

R9 285 15.96
+329%
GTX 550 Ti 3.72

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 285 6680
+329%
GTX 550 Ti 1558
Samples: 8291

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:

900p160−170
+321%
38
−321%
Full HD150−160
+305%
37
−305%

Cost per frame, $

1080p1.66
+143%
4.03
−143%
  • R9 285 has 143% lower cost per frame in 1080p

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Fortnite 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Dota 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Fortnite 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Metro Exodus 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Valorant 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Dota 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Valorant 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Metro Exodus 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Valorant 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

4K
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

This is how R9 285 and GTX 550 Ti compete in popular games:

  • R9 285 is 321% faster in 900p
  • R9 285 is 305% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 58 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 15.96 3.72
Recency 2 September 2014 15 March 2011
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 190 Watt 116 Watt

R9 285 has a 329% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

GTX 550 Ti, on the other hand, has 63.8% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R9 285 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 550 Ti in performance tests.

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 GeForce GTX 550 Ti
GeForce GTX 550 Ti

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
4.9 59911 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 550 Ti 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 GeForce GTX 550 Ti, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.