AMD Radeon R9 285 vs ATI FireGL V3400
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon R9 285 and ATI FireGL V3400 videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Technologies. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Differences
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R9 285
- Videocard is newer: launch date 8 year(s) 11 month(s) later
- Around 84% higher core clock speed: 918 MHz vs 500 MHz
- 51.4x more texture fill rate: 102.8 GTexel / s vs 2 GTexel / s
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 28 nm vs 90 nm
- 16x more maximum memory size: 2 GB vs 128 MB
- 5.5x more memory clock speed: 5500 MHz vs 1000 MHz
- 64.9x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 6680 vs 103
- Around 69% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 597 vs 353
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 2 September 2014 vs 1 October 2005 |
Core clock speed | 918 MHz vs 500 MHz |
Texture fill rate | 102.8 GTexel / s vs 2 GTexel / s |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm vs 90 nm |
Maximum memory size | 2 GB vs 128 MB |
Memory clock speed | 5500 MHz vs 1000 MHz |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 6680 vs 103 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 597 vs 353 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD Radeon R9 285
GPU 2: ATI FireGL V3400
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
Name | AMD Radeon R9 285 | ATI FireGL V3400 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 6680 | 103 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 597 | 353 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 72.799 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1474.632 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 6.369 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 91.954 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 391.399 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 6474 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3043 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 2782 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 6474 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3043 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2782 | |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 2778 |
Compare specifications (specs)
AMD Radeon R9 285 | ATI FireGL V3400 | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | GCN 3.0 | R500 |
Code name | Tonga | RV530 |
Design | AMD Radeon R9 200 Series | |
Launch date | 2 September 2014 | 1 October 2005 |
Launch price (MSRP) | $249 | |
Place in performance rating | 456 | 458 |
Type | Desktop | Workstation |
Technical info |
||
Core clock speed | 918 MHz | 500 MHz |
Floating-point performance | 3,290 gflops | |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 90 nm |
Pipelines | 1792 | |
Texture fill rate | 102.8 GTexel / s | 2 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 190 Watt | |
Transistor count | 5,000 million | 157 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort | No outputs |
VGA | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 1.0 x16 |
Length | 221 mm | |
Supplementary power connectors | 2x 6-pin | None |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12 | 9.0c |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 2.0 |
Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 128 MB |
Memory bandwidth | 176.0 GB / s | 16 GB / s |
Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 128 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 5500 MHz | 1000 MHz |
Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR3 |
Technologies |
||
HD3D | ||
LiquidVR | ||
TressFX | ||
TrueAudio | ||
Unified Video Decoder (UVD) |