GeForce GTX 485M SLI vs Radeon RX Vega M GL

Place in the ranking	449	479
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	10.71	6.30
Architecture	GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)	Fermi (2010−2014)
GPU code name	Polaris 22	N11E-GTX-A1
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	1 February 2018 (6 years ago)	6 January 2011 (14 years ago)

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 cores	1280	768
Core clock speed	931 MHz	575 MHz
Boost clock speed	1011 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	5,000 million	no data
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	65 Watt	100 Watt
Texture fill rate	80.88	no data
Floating-point processing power	2.588 TFLOPS	no data
ROPs	32	no data
TMUs	80	no 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 size	no data	large
Interface	IGP	no 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 type	HBM2	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	2x2 GB
Memory bus width	1024 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	700 MHz	1500 MHz
Memory bandwidth	179.2 GB/s	no data
Shared memory	-	-

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 Connectors

No outputs

no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_0)	11
Shader Model	6.4	no data
OpenGL	4.6	no data
OpenCL	2.0	no data
Vulkan	1.2.131	-

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:

900p	95−100 +6.7%	89 −6.7%
Full HD	100−110 +3.1%	97 −3.1%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Medium Preset

Fortnite	55−60 +18%	50−55 −18%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	75−80 +11.4%	70−75 −11.4%

Full HD
High Preset

Dota 2	35−40 +9.1%	30−35 −9.1%
Fortnite	55−60 +9.3%	50−55 −9.3%
Grand Theft Auto V	35−40 +12.5%	30−35 −12.5%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	75−80 +9.9%	70−75 −9.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	30−33 +7.1%	27−30 −7.1%
World of Tanks	140−150 +8.2%	130−140 −8.2%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Dota 2	35−40 +9.1%	30−35 −9.1%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	75−80 +9.9%	70−75 −9.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	30−33 +11.1%	27−30 −11.1%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite

55−60
+18%

50−55

−18%

4K
High Preset

Grand Theft Auto V	20−22 +5.3%	18−20 −5.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	20−22 +5.3%	18−20 −5.3%

4K
Ultra Preset

Dota 2	20−22 +0%	20−22 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	27−30 +20.8%	24−27 −20.8%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite

10−12

+22.2%

9−10
−22.2%

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Elden Ring	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	30−33 +0%	30−33 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Metro Exodus	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Valorant	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	30−33 +0%	30−33 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Elden Ring	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Far Cry 5	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Metro Exodus	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Valorant	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	30−33 +0%	30−33 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Far Cry 5	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Valorant	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Elden Ring	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
World of Tanks	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Far Cry 5	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Metro Exodus	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Valorant	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Dota 2	20−22 +0%	20−22 +0%
Elden Ring	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Metro Exodus	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Far Cry 5	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Fortnite	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Valorant	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%

This is how RX Vega M GL and GTX 485M SLI compete in popular games:

RX Vega M GL is 7% faster in 900p
RX Vega M GL is 3% faster in 1080p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

in Grand Theft Auto V, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the RX Vega M GL is 13% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

RX Vega M GL is ahead in 10 tests (16%)
there's a draw in 53 tests (84%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	10.09	9.13
Recency	1 February 2018	6 January 2011
Chip lithography	14 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	65 Watt	100 Watt

RX Vega M GL has a 10.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 185.7% more advanced lithography process, and 53.8% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX Vega M GL is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 485M SLI in performance tests.

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