AMD Radeon R9 285 vs ATI FirePro V8700
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon R9 285 and ATI FirePro V8700 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 5 year(s) 11 month(s) later
- Around 22% higher core clock speed: 918 MHz vs 750 MHz
- 3.4x more texture fill rate: 102.8 GTexel / s vs 30 GTexel / s
- 2.2x more pipelines: 1792 vs 800
- 2.7x better floating-point performance: 3,290 gflops vs 1,200.0 gflops
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 28 nm vs 55 nm
- 2x more maximum memory size: 2 GB vs 1 GB
- Around 62% higher memory clock speed: 5500 MHz vs 3400 MHz
- 4.3x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 6680 vs 1539
- Around 13% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 597 vs 527
- 18.2x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 2782 vs 152.6
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 2 September 2014 vs 11 September 2008 |
| Core clock speed | 918 MHz vs 750 MHz |
| Texture fill rate | 102.8 GTexel / s vs 30 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 1792 vs 800 |
| Floating-point performance | 3,290 gflops vs 1,200.0 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm vs 55 nm |
| Maximum memory size | 2 GB vs 1 GB |
| Memory clock speed | 5500 MHz vs 3400 MHz |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 6680 vs 1539 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 597 vs 527 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2782 vs 152.6 |
Reasons to consider the ATI FirePro V8700
- Around 26% lower typical power consumption: 151 Watt vs 190 Watt
- 3.1x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 8543 vs 2782
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 151 Watt vs 190 Watt |
| Benchmarks | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 8543 vs 2782 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD Radeon R9 285
GPU 2: ATI FirePro V8700
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
| Name | AMD Radeon R9 285 | ATI FirePro V8700 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 6680 | 1539 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 597 | 527 |
| 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 | 8543 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 6474 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3043 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2782 | 152.6 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 2778 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| AMD Radeon R9 285 | ATI FirePro V8700 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | GCN 3.0 | TeraScale |
| Code name | Tonga | RV770 |
| Design | AMD Radeon R9 200 Series | |
| Launch date | 2 September 2014 | 11 September 2008 |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $249 | $1,499 |
| Place in performance rating | 445 | 442 |
| Type | Desktop | Workstation |
Technical info |
||
| Core clock speed | 918 MHz | 750 MHz |
| Floating-point performance | 3,290 gflops | 1,200.0 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 55 nm |
| Pipelines | 1792 | 800 |
| Texture fill rate | 102.8 GTexel / s | 30 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 190 Watt | 151 Watt |
| Transistor count | 5,000 million | 956 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort | 1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort, 1x S-Video |
| VGA | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Length | 221 mm | 254 mm |
| Supplementary power connectors | 2x 6-pin | 2x 6-pin |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12 | 10.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 3.3 |
| Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 1 GB |
| Memory bandwidth | 176.0 GB / s | 108.8 GB / s |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 5500 MHz | 3400 MHz |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Technologies |
||
| HD3D | ||
| LiquidVR | ||
| TressFX | ||
| TrueAudio | ||
| Unified Video Decoder (UVD) | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare AMD Radeon R9 285 with others
AMDRadeon R9 285 vs
NVIDIAGeForce 9300 + nForce 730i
AMDRadeon R9 285 vs
ATIRadeon HD 4870 X2
AMDRadeon R9 285 vs
ATIFirePro V8700
AMDRadeon R9 285 vs
AMDFirePro S10000
AMDRadeon R9 285 vs
AMDRadeon Pro WX 4170 Mobile
AMDRadeon R9 285 vs
NVIDIAP106-100
