
GeForce GTX 970M vs Radeon R9 285 / 380

GeForce GTX 970M
Popular choices:

Radeon R9 285 / 380
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. The GeForce GTX 970M is positioned at rank #27 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Great cost-benefit for your build. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GeForce GTX 970M
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce GTX 970M is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.8% higher G3D Mark score and 50% more VRAM (3 GB vs 2 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Radeon R9 285 / 380.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 970M | Radeon R9 285 / 380 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+2.8%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.8%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / GCN 3.0 (2014−2019)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+50%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the GeForce GTX 970M remains the clear technical winner. Check real-time availability to determine if the performance gap justifies the market price.
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 970M and Radeon R9 285 / 380

GeForce GTX 970M
The GeForce GTX 970M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in October 7 2014. It features the Maxwell 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 924 MHz to 1038 MHz. It has 1280 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 81W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 5,705 points. Launch price was $2,560.89.

Radeon R9 285 / 380
The Radeon R9 285 / 380 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in September 2 2014. It features the GCN 3.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 918 MHz. It has 1792 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 190W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 5,550 points. Launch price was $249.
Graphics Performance
The GeForce GTX 970M scores 5,705 and the Radeon R9 285 / 380 reaches 5,550 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.8% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 970M is built on Maxwell 2.0 while the Radeon R9 285 / 380 uses GCN 3.0, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 1,280 (GeForce GTX 970M) vs 1,792 (Radeon R9 285 / 380). Raw compute: 2.657 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 970M) vs 3.29 TFLOPS (Radeon R9 285 / 380).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 970M | Radeon R9 285 / 380 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 5,705+3% | 5,550 |
| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | GCN 3.0 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 1280 | 1792+40% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 2.657 TFLOPS | 3.29 TFLOPS+24% |
| ROPs | 48+50% | 32 |
| TMUs | 80 | 112+40% |
| L1 Cache | 480 KB+7% | 448 KB |
| L2 Cache | 1.5 MB+200% | 0.5 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce GTX 970M | Radeon R9 285 / 380 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 2.1 (Compatible) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | FSR 3 (Compatible) | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | AMD Anti-Lag |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GeForce GTX 970M comes with 3 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon R9 285 / 380 has 2 GB. The GeForce GTX 970M offers 50% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Memory bandwidth: 120 GB/s (GeForce GTX 970M) vs 176 GB/s (Radeon R9 285 / 380) — a 46.7% advantage for the Radeon R9 285 / 380. Bus width: 192-bit vs 256-bit. L2 Cache: 1.5 MB (GeForce GTX 970M) vs 0.5 MB (Radeon R9 285 / 380) — the GeForce GTX 970M has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 970M | Radeon R9 285 / 380 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 3 GB+50% | 2 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 120 GB/s | 176 GB/s+47% |
| Bus Width | 192-bit | 256-bit+33% |
| L2 Cache | 1.5 MB+200% | 0.5 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12_1 (GeForce GTX 970M) vs 12 (Radeon R9 285 / 380). Maximum simultaneous displays: 0 vs 4.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 970M | Radeon R9 285 / 380 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12_1 | 12 |
| Max Displays | 0 | 4 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 5th Gen (GeForce GTX 970M) vs VCE 3.0 (Radeon R9 285 / 380). Decoder: NVDEC 2nd Gen vs UVD 5.0.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 970M | Radeon R9 285 / 380 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 5th Gen | VCE 3.0 |
| Decoder | NVDEC 2nd Gen | UVD 5.0 |
| Codecs | — | H.264,HEVC,VP9 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 970M draws 81W versus the Radeon R9 285 / 380's 190W — a 80.4% difference. The GeForce GTX 970M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce GTX 970M) vs 500W (Radeon R9 285 / 380). Power connectors: 1x 6-pin vs 2x 6-pin. Card length: 1mm vs 221mm, occupying 0 vs 2 slots.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 970M | Radeon R9 285 / 380 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 81W-57% | 190W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W-30% | 500W |
| Power Connector | 1x 6-pin | 2x 6-pin |
| Length | 1mm | 221mm |
| Height | — | 111mm |
| Slots | 0-100% | 2 |
| Perf/Watt | 70.4+141% | 29.2 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
















