GeForce GTX 765M SLI vs Radeon R9 285

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 285 with GeForce GTX 765M SLI, including specs and performance data.

R9 285
2014, $249
2 GB GDDR5, 190 Watt
15.97
+65%

R9 285 outperforms 765M SLI by an impressive 65% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking368496
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation7.68no data
Power efficiency6.475.73
ArchitectureGCN 3.0 (2014−2019)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameTongano data
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date2 September 2014 (11 years ago)30 May 2013 (12 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 cores17921536
Core clock speed918 MHz850 MHz
Number of transistors5,000 million2x 2540 Million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)190 Watt130 Watt
Texture fill rate102.8no data
Floating-point processing power3.29 TFLOPSno data
ROPs32no data
TMUs112no data
L1 Cache448 KBno data
L2 Cache512 KBno 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).

Laptop sizeno datalarge
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16no data
Length221 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-pinno data
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 GB2x 2 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit2x 128 Bit
Memory clock speed1375 MHz4000 MHz
Memory bandwidth176.0 GB/sno data
Shared memory--

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 data
HDMI+-

Supported technologies

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

Optimus-+

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (12_0)11
Shader Model6.5no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL2.1no data
Vulkan1.2.170-
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 15.97
+65%
GTX 765M SLI 9.68

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

R9 285 8570
+68.9%
GTX 765M SLI 5073

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:

Full HD110−120
+54.9%
71
−54.9%

Cost per frame, $

1080p2.26no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Fortnite 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Valorant 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 197
+0%
197
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Dota 2 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Fortnite 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Metro Exodus 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Valorant 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Dota 2 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Valorant 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Metro Exodus 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Valorant 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Metro Exodus 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Valorant 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Dota 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

This is how R9 285 and GTX 765M SLI compete in popular games:

  • R9 285 is 55% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 60 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 15.97 9.68
Recency 2 September 2014 30 May 2013
Power consumption (TDP) 190 Watt 130 Watt

R9 285 has a 65% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 1 year.

GTX 765M SLI, on the other hand, has 46% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R9 285 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 765M SLI in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R9 285 is a desktop graphics card while GeForce GTX 765M SLI is a notebook one.

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
1.3 25 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 765M SLI 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 765M SLI, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.