Radeon R9 285 vs Quadro M4000
Radeon R9 285
Popular choices:
Quadro M4000
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. 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
Performance Per Dollar Quadro M4000
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Radeon R9 285 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0% higher G3D Mark score. However, the Quadro M4000 offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | Radeon R9 285 | Quadro M4000 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+0%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / GCN 3.0 (2014−2019)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The Radeon R9 285 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Radeon R9 285 holds the technical lead. Priced at $40 (vs $350), it costs 89% less, resulting in a 775.1% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Radeon R9 285 | Quadro M4000 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+775.1%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($40) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($350) |
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 Radeon R9 285 and Quadro M4000
Radeon R9 285
The Radeon R9 285 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: 6,680 points. Launch price was $249.
Quadro M4000
The Quadro M4000 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in August 18 2015. It features the Maxwell 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 975 MHz to 1013 MHz. It has 1,280 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 100W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6,679 points.
Graphics Performance
The Radeon R9 285 scores 6,680 and the Quadro M4000 reaches 6,679 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon R9 285 is built on GCN 3.0 while the Quadro M4000 uses Maxwell 2.0, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 1,792 (Radeon R9 285) vs 1 (Quadro M4000). Raw compute: 3.29 TFLOPS (Radeon R9 285) vs 2.496 TFLOPS (Quadro M4000).
| Feature | Radeon R9 285 | Quadro M4000 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 6,680 | 6,679 |
| Architecture | GCN 3.0 | Maxwell 2.0 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 1792+40% | 1,280 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 3.29 TFLOPS+32% | 2.496 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 32 | 64+100% |
| TMUs | 112+40% | 80 |
| L1 Cache | 448 KB | 480 KB+7% |
| L2 Cache | 0.5 MB | 2 MB+300% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Radeon R9 285 | Quadro M4000 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | AMD Anti-Lag | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The Radeon R9 285 comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the Quadro M4000 has 8 GB. The Quadro M4000 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Memory bandwidth: 176 GB/s (Radeon R9 285) vs 211 GB/s (Quadro M4000) — a 19.9% advantage for the Quadro M4000. Bus width: 256-bit vs 256-bit. L2 Cache: 0.5 MB (Radeon R9 285) vs 2 MB (Quadro M4000) — the Quadro M4000 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Radeon R9 285 | Quadro M4000 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 8 GB+100% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 176 GB/s | 211 GB/s+20% |
| Bus Width | 256-bit | 256-bit |
| L2 Cache | 0.5 MB | 2 MB+300% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12.0 (Radeon R9 285) vs 12 (12_1) (Quadro M4000). Vulkan: 1.2 vs 1.4. OpenGL: 4.4 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.
| Feature | Radeon R9 285 | Quadro M4000 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12.0 | 12 (12_1) |
| Vulkan | 1.2 | 1.4+17% |
| OpenGL | 4.4 | 4.6+5% |
| Max Displays | 4 | 4 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: VCE 3.0 (Radeon R9 285) vs 5th Gen NVENC (Maxwell) (Quadro M4000). Decoder: UVD 5.0 vs 1st Gen NVDEC. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264 (Radeon R9 285) vs H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 (Quadro M4000).
| Feature | Radeon R9 285 | Quadro M4000 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | VCE 3.0 | 5th Gen NVENC (Maxwell) |
| Decoder | UVD 5.0 | 1st Gen NVDEC |
| Codecs | MPEG-2,H.264 | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon R9 285 draws 190W versus the Quadro M4000's 100W — a 62.1% difference. The Quadro M4000 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 500W (Radeon R9 285) vs 350W (Quadro M4000). Power connectors: 2x 6-pin vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 221mm vs 241mm, occupying 2 vs 1 slots. Typical load temperature: 65°C vs 82°C.
| Feature | Radeon R9 285 | Quadro M4000 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 190W | 100W-47% |
| Recommended PSU | 500W | 350W-30% |
| Power Connector | 2x 6-pin | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 221mm | 241mm |
| Height | 109mm | 111mm |
| Slots | 2 | 1-50% |
| Temp (Load) | 65°C-21% | 82°C |
| Perf/Watt | 35.2 | 66.8+90% |
Value Analysis
The Radeon R9 285 launched at $249 MSRP and currently averages $40, while the Quadro M4000 launched at $791 and now averages $350. The Radeon R9 285 costs 88.6% less ($310 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 167.0 (Radeon R9 285) vs 19.1 (Quadro M4000) — the Radeon R9 285 offers 774.3% better value. The Quadro M4000 is the newer GPU (2015 vs 2014).
| Feature | Radeon R9 285 | Quadro M4000 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $249-69% | $791 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $40-89% | $350 |
| Performance per Dollar | 167.0+774% | 19.1 |
| Codename | Tonga | GM204 |
| Release | September 2 2014 | August 18 2015 |
| Ranking | #365 | #392 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Radeon R9 285 and Quadro M4000
