
GeForce RTX 3060 Ti
Popular choices:

Radeon R9 M485X
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.
Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook
This comparison brings together gaming FPS, raw graphics performance, VRAM, feature set, power efficiency, pricing context, and long-term value so you can see which GPU actually makes more sense.
GeForce RTX 3060 Ti
2020Why buy it
- ✅207.9% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ✅Costs $51 less on MSRP ($399 MSRP vs $450 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 502.7% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 50.9 vs 8.4 G3D/$ ($399 MSRP vs $450 MSRP).
- ✅Access to DLSS 2 Super Resolution (2020).
- ✅300% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (8 GB vs 2 GB).
Trade-offs
- ❌Fewer clear downsides in this head-to-head, aside from the usual pricing and availability swings.
Radeon R9 M485X
2016Why buy it
- ✅Competitive enough if your priority is price, power, or specific feature preference.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower average FPS than GeForce RTX 3060 Ti across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ❌Less VRAM, with 2 GB vs 8 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
- ❌No DLSS support; it relies on FSR Upscaling / FSR 4 (2025) instead.
- ❌Very weak future-proofing: 2016-era hardware with 2 GB of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
- ❌12.8% HIGHER MSRP$450 MSRPvs$399 MSRP
GeForce RTX 3060 Ti
2020Radeon R9 M485X
2016Why buy it
- ✅207.9% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ✅Costs $51 less on MSRP ($399 MSRP vs $450 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 502.7% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 50.9 vs 8.4 G3D/$ ($399 MSRP vs $450 MSRP).
- ✅Access to DLSS 2 Super Resolution (2020).
- ✅300% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (8 GB vs 2 GB).
Why buy it
- ✅Competitive enough if your priority is price, power, or specific feature preference.
Trade-offs
- ❌Fewer clear downsides in this head-to-head, aside from the usual pricing and availability swings.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower average FPS than GeForce RTX 3060 Ti across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ❌Less VRAM, with 2 GB vs 8 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
- ❌No DLSS support; it relies on FSR Upscaling / FSR 4 (2025) instead.
- ❌Very weak future-proofing: 2016-era hardware with 2 GB of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
- ❌12.8% HIGHER MSRP$450 MSRPvs$399 MSRP
Quick Answers
So, is GeForce RTX 3060 Ti better than Radeon R9 M485X?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper card?
Is Radeon R9 M485X still worth buying for gaming in 2026?
Games Benchmarks
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 9800X3D 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.

Path of Exile 2
| Preset | GeForce RTX 3060 Ti | Radeon R9 M485X |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 152 FPS | 80 FPS |
| medium | 137 FPS | 66 FPS |
| high | 118 FPS | 52 FPS |
| ultra | 100 FPS | 34 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 131 FPS | 67 FPS |
| medium | 107 FPS | 56 FPS |
| high | 91 FPS | 40 FPS |
| ultra | 82 FPS | 25 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 77 FPS | 25 FPS |
| medium | 65 FPS | 23 FPS |
| high | 50 FPS | 15 FPS |
| ultra | 43 FPS | 13 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | GeForce RTX 3060 Ti | Radeon R9 M485X |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 425 FPS | 96 FPS |
| medium | 366 FPS | 75 FPS |
| high | 296 FPS | 62 FPS |
| ultra | 248 FPS | 45 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 272 FPS | 58 FPS |
| medium | 229 FPS | 41 FPS |
| high | 190 FPS | 32 FPS |
| ultra | 156 FPS | 24 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 133 FPS | 24 FPS |
| medium | 114 FPS | 17 FPS |
| high | 96 FPS | 13 FPS |
| ultra | 73 FPS | 10 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | GeForce RTX 3060 Ti | Radeon R9 M485X |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 859 FPS | 171 FPS |
| medium | 693 FPS | 137 FPS |
| high | 602 FPS | 114 FPS |
| ultra | 457 FPS | 86 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 658 FPS | 128 FPS |
| medium | 529 FPS | 103 FPS |
| high | 452 FPS | 86 FPS |
| ultra | 343 FPS | 64 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 434 FPS | 86 FPS |
| medium | 346 FPS | 68 FPS |
| high | 275 FPS | 57 FPS |
| ultra | 221 FPS | 43 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | GeForce RTX 3060 Ti | Radeon R9 M485X |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 580 FPS | 146 FPS |
| medium | 514 FPS | 117 FPS |
| high | 424 FPS | 100 FPS |
| ultra | 373 FPS | 82 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 478 FPS | 107 FPS |
| medium | 427 FPS | 87 FPS |
| high | 335 FPS | 75 FPS |
| ultra | 290 FPS | 58 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 285 FPS | 63 FPS |
| medium | 266 FPS | 48 FPS |
| high | 234 FPS | 37 FPS |
| ultra | 195 FPS | 26 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce RTX 3060 Ti and Radeon R9 M485X

GeForce RTX 3060 Ti
GeForce RTX 3060 Ti
The GeForce RTX 3060 Ti is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in December 1 2020. It features the Ampere architecture. The core clock ranges from 1410 MHz to 1665 MHz. It has 4864 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 200W. Manufactured using 8 nm process technology. It features 38 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 20,312 points. Launch price was $399.

Radeon R9 M485X
Radeon R9 M485X
The Radeon R9 M485X is manufactured by AMD. It was released in May 15 2016. It features the GCN 3.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 723 MHz. It has 2048 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 250W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,801 points.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce RTX 3060 Ti scores 20,312 versus the Radeon R9 M485X's 3,801 — the GeForce RTX 3060 Ti leads by 434.4%. The GeForce RTX 3060 Ti is built on Ampere while the Radeon R9 M485X uses GCN 3.0, both on 8 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 4,864 (GeForce RTX 3060 Ti) vs 2,048 (Radeon R9 M485X). Raw compute: 16.2 TFLOPS (GeForce RTX 3060 Ti) vs 2.961 TFLOPS (Radeon R9 M485X).
| Feature | GeForce RTX 3060 Ti | Radeon R9 M485X |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 20,312+434% | 3,801 |
| Architecture | Ampere | GCN 3.0 |
| Process Node | 8 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 4864+138% | 2048 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 16.2 TFLOPS+447% | 2.961 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 80+150% | 32 |
| TMUs | 152+19% | 128 |
| L1 Cache | 4.8 MB+860% | 0.5 MB |
| L2 Cache | 4 MB+700% | 0.5 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
The GeForce RTX 3060 Ti gives access to NVIDIA DLSS (Deep Learning Super Sampling), widely regarding as the superior upscaling method for image quality. The Radeon R9 M485X relies on FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution), which is capable but generally slightly noisier than DLSS in motion.
| Feature | GeForce RTX 3060 Ti | Radeon R9 M485X |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | DLSS 2 Super Resolution | FSR Upscaling / FSR 4 |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | NVIDIA Reflex | AMD Anti-Lag |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GeForce RTX 3060 Ti comes with 8 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon R9 M485X has 2 GB. The GeForce RTX 3060 Ti offers 300% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 256-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 4 MB (GeForce RTX 3060 Ti) vs 0.5 MB (Radeon R9 M485X) — the GeForce RTX 3060 Ti has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce RTX 3060 Ti | Radeon R9 M485X |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 8 GB+300% | 2 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 448 GB/s | Unknown |
| Bus Width | 256-bit+100% | 128-bit |
| L2 Cache | 4 MB+700% | 0.5 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 Ultimate (12_2) (GeForce RTX 3060 Ti) vs 12 (Radeon R9 M485X). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.2. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.
| Feature | GeForce RTX 3060 Ti | Radeon R9 M485X |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12 |
| Vulkan | 1.3+8% | 1.2 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 4 | 4 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC (Ampere) (GeForce RTX 3060 Ti) vs VCE 3.0 (Radeon R9 M485X). Decoder: NVDEC (Ampere) vs UVD 6.0. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265,VP9,AV1 (GeForce RTX 3060 Ti) vs H.264,HEVC,VP9 (Radeon R9 M485X).
| Feature | GeForce RTX 3060 Ti | Radeon R9 M485X |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC (Ampere) | VCE 3.0 |
| Decoder | NVDEC (Ampere) | UVD 6.0 |
| Codecs | H.264,H.265,VP9,AV1 | H.264,HEVC,VP9 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce RTX 3060 Ti draws 200W versus the Radeon R9 M485X's 250W — a 22.2% difference. The GeForce RTX 3060 Ti is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 600W (GeForce RTX 3060 Ti) vs 350W (Radeon R9 M485X). Power connectors: 8-pin vs Mobile. Typical load temperature: 75 vs 80°C.
| Feature | GeForce RTX 3060 Ti | Radeon R9 M485X |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 200W-20% | 250W |
| Recommended PSU | 600W | 350W-42% |
| Power Connector | 8-pin | Mobile |
| Length | 242mm | — |
| Height | 112mm | — |
| Slots | 2 | — |
| Temp (Load) | 75-6% | 80°C |
| Perf/Watt | 101.6+568% | 15.2 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce RTX 3060 Ti launched at $399 MSRP, while the Radeon R9 M485X launched at $450. The GeForce RTX 3060 Ti costs 11.3% less ($51 savings) on MSRP. Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 50.9 (GeForce RTX 3060 Ti) vs 8.4 (Radeon R9 M485X) — the GeForce RTX 3060 Ti offers 506% better value. The GeForce RTX 3060 Ti is the newer GPU (2020 vs 2016).
| Feature | GeForce RTX 3060 Ti | Radeon R9 M485X |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $399-11% | $450 |
| Performance per Dollar | 50.9+506% | 8.4 |
| Codename | GA104 | Amethyst |
| Release | December 1 2020 | May 15 2016 |
| Ranking | #73 | #519 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.












