Radeon R9 285 vs RX Vega 11 Embedded

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot rated313
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data8.59
Power efficiencyno data6.35
ArchitectureGCN 5.0 (2017−2020)GCN 3.0 (2014−2019)
GPU code nameRavenTonga
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date19 April 2018 (6 years ago)2 September 2014 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$249

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores7041792
Core clock speed300 MHz918 MHz
Boost clock speed1251 MHzno data
Number of transistors4,940 million5,000 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt190 Watt
Texture fill rate55.04102.8
Floating-point processing power1.761 TFLOPS3.29 TFLOPS
ROPs832
TMUs44112

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).

InterfaceIGPPCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data221 mm
WidthIGP2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone2x 6-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 typeSystem SharedGDDR5
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared2 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared256 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared1375 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data176.0 GB/s

Connectivity and outputs

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 ConnectorsNo outputs2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, 1x DisplayPort 1.2
HDMI-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (12_0)
Shader Model6.46.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.02.1
Vulkan1.2.1311.2.170

Pros & cons summary


Recency 19 April 2018 2 September 2014
Chip lithography 14 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 190 Watt

RX Vega 11 Embedded has an age advantage of 3 years, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 442.9% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Radeon RX Vega 11 Embedded and Radeon R9 285. We've got no test results to judge.


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

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 RX Vega 11 Embedded
Radeon RX Vega 11 Embedded
AMD Radeon R9 285
Radeon R9 285

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


3.8 12 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega 11 Embedded on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2 76 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

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