Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Arc) vs Radeon R9 285

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 285 with Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Arc), including specs and performance data.

R9 285
2014, $249
2 GB GDDR5, 190 Watt
15.96
+69.8%

R9 285 outperforms Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Arc) by an impressive 70% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking364494
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation7.66no data
Power efficiency6.46no data
ArchitectureGCN 3.0 (2014−2019)Xe LPG (2023)
GPU code nameTongaMeteor Lake iGPU
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date2 September 2014 (11 years ago)14 December 2023 (1 year 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 cores17924
Core clock speed918 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1950 MHz
Number of transistors5,000 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)190 Wattno data
Texture fill rate102.8no data
Floating-point processing power3.29 TFLOPSno data
ROPs32no data
TMUs112no data
L1 Cache448 KB768 KB
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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16no data
Length221 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-pinno data

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 typeGDDR5no data
Maximum RAM amount2 GBno data
Memory bus width256 Bitno data
Memory clock speed1375 MHzno data
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+-

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (12_0)no data
Shader Model6.5no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL2.1no data
Vulkan1.2.170-

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
+69.8%
Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Arc) 9.40

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
+67%
Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Arc) 5131

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 HD30−35
+50%
20
−50%

Cost per frame, $

1080p8.30no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Far Cry 5 24
+0%
24
+0%
Fortnite 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+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 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Far Cry 5 22
+0%
22
+0%
Fortnite 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 15
+0%
15
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Metro Exodus 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30
+0%
30
+0%
Valorant 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Far Cry 5 21
+0%
21
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16
+0%
16
+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 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Metro Exodus 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Valorant 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Far Cry 5 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
+0%
5−6
+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%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
+0%
5−6
+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 Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Arc) compete in popular games:

  • R9 285 is 50% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 60 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 15.96 9.40
Recency 2 September 2014 14 December 2023
Chip lithography 28 nm 5 nm

R9 285 has a 69.8% higher aggregate performance score.

Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Arc), on the other hand, has an age advantage of 9 years, and a 460% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon R9 285 is our recommended choice as it beats the Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Arc) in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R9 285 is a desktop graphics card while Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Arc) is a notebook 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
Intel Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Arc)
Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Arc)

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
3 1 vote

Rate Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Arc) 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 Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Arc), agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.