AMD Radeon R9 285 vs ATI Radeon HD 4870 X2
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon R9 285 and ATI Radeon HD 4870 X2 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 6 year(s) 0 month(s) later
- Around 31% higher core clock speed: 918 MHz vs 700 MHz
- Around 12% higher pipelines: 1792 vs 2x 800
- Around 47% better floating-point performance: 3,290 gflops vs 2x 1,120.0 gflops
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 28 nm vs 55 nm
- Around 51% lower typical power consumption: 190 Watt vs 286 Watt
- Around 53% higher memory clock speed: 5500 MHz vs 3600 MHz
- 5.1x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 6680 vs 1309
- Around 6% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 597 vs 565
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 2 September 2014 vs 12 August 2008 |
| Core clock speed | 918 MHz vs 700 MHz |
| Pipelines | 1792 vs 2x 800 |
| Floating-point performance | 3,290 gflops vs 2x 1,120.0 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm vs 55 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 190 Watt vs 286 Watt |
| Memory clock speed | 5500 MHz vs 3600 MHz |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 6680 vs 1309 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 597 vs 565 |
Reasons to consider the ATI Radeon HD 4870 X2
- 2.2x more texture fill rate: 2x 28 GTexel / s billion / sec vs 102.8 GTexel / s
- Around 19% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3323 vs 2782
- Around 19% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3323 vs 2782
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Texture fill rate | 2x 28 GTexel / s billion / sec vs 102.8 GTexel / s |
| Benchmarks | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3323 vs 2782 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3323 vs 2782 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD Radeon R9 285
GPU 2: ATI Radeon HD 4870 X2
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
| Name | AMD Radeon R9 285 | ATI Radeon HD 4870 X2 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 6680 | 1309 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 597 | 565 |
| 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 | 3323 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 6474 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3043 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2782 | 3323 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 2778 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| AMD Radeon R9 285 | ATI Radeon HD 4870 X2 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | GCN 3.0 | TeraScale |
| Code name | Tonga | R700 |
| Design | AMD Radeon R9 200 Series | |
| Launch date | 2 September 2014 | 12 August 2008 |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $249 | $550 |
| Place in performance rating | 445 | 447 |
| Type | Desktop | Desktop |
Technical info |
||
| Core clock speed | 918 MHz | 700 MHz |
| Floating-point performance | 3,290 gflops | 2x 1,120.0 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 55 nm |
| Pipelines | 1792 | 2x 800 |
| Texture fill rate | 102.8 GTexel / s | 2x 28 GTexel / s billion / sec |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 190 Watt | 286 Watt |
| Transistor count | 5,000 million | 956 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort | 2x DVI, 1x S-Video |
| VGA | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Length | 221 mm | 267 mm |
| Supplementary power connectors | 2x 6-pin | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12 | 10.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 3.3 |
| Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 2x 1 GB |
| Memory bandwidth | 176.0 GB / s | 2x 115.2 GB / s |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 2x 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 5500 MHz | 3600 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
