NVIDIA
GeForce GT 1030 vs Radeon R9 285
Full comparison of specs, performance and benchmarks
AMD
R9 285
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GT 1030 and R9 285 across specs and all relevant benchmarks.
↗R9 285 outperforms GT 1030 by ~6% on the catalog index; this is not a measured FPS gain.+6%
Scores are normalized on the Head to Head scale. Higher is better. How is this calculated?H2HBench Data Quality
Low confidenceSpecifications: Field verification not recordedVerified gaming results: 0Estimated / unverified results: 32Price record updated: Sep 6, 2026
Limited verified data
H2HBench Verdict
Higher catalog score: GeForce GT 1030 (~13%)
The score difference is not a measured FPS improvement.
Reasons to consider GT 1030
- Lower stated power consumption
- Recorded feature support: OpenCL 3.0, CUDA 6.1 · Not supported
Reasons to consider R9 285
- Higher catalog performance index
- Recorded feature support: OpenCL 2.1 · Not supported
Catalog metrics radar
Axes with missing data are hidden; every value uses a fixed scale.
NVIDIA
AMDPerformance
Efficiency
Price / performance
Memory capacity
3234
10060
100100
5656
Graphics card ranking
Positions 132–137of 321
Which should you choose?
Two practical conclusions based on community votes and gaming value.
Radeon R9 285
108 likesHead to Head visitors currently choose this model more often.
Radeon R9 285
Price $50.00Based on catalog performance per unit of current market price, not measured FPS.
Overview
Scores are calculated from specifications, performance, and efficiency.
GamesDirectX, OpenCL, and Vulkan performance
32
34Better
Professional applications3D modeling, video editing, and rendering
29
31Better
AI and machine learningMachine-learning and AI capabilities
27
28Better
Power efficiencyPower consumption across workloads
100Better
60
Head to Head scoreOverall catalog score
52Better
46
Specifications
The better numeric value is highlighted in green, taking the metric direction into account.
Clock speedBetter
Memory type
Power connector
Release date
Architecture
OpenGL
TFLOPSBetter
Interface
Power consumptionBetter
HDMI
Device class
DisplayPort
Max monitors
Max resolution
USB Type-C
DirectX
Vulkan
Power consumptionBetter
Thickness
Compute API
Launch priceBetter
Shader units / coresBetter
Base clockBetter
Boost clockBetter
VRAM
Memory frequencyBetter
Memory busBetter
Memory bandwidthBetter
Process nodeBetter
Recommended PSUBetter
LengthBetter
Die sizeBetter
Memory cache
Transistor countBetter
Upscaling
Gaming FPS
Available results are shown separately; missing data is not treated as zero.
The Gaming FPS section compares GT 1030 and R9 285 across curated H2H Lab game presets. The useful signal is not only average FPS, but also how each device behaves at 1440p and 4K, how memory capacity and bus width affect heavy textures, and whether the game engine favors raster performance, ray tracing, or driver maturity.
GT 1030R9 285
Verified externalEstimatedSources ↗
Counter-Strike 2
1080p High
160 FPS
175 FPS
1080p Ultra
112 FPS
120 FPS
1440p Ultra
60 FPS
65 FPS
4K Ultra
22 FPS
24 FPS
Counter-Strike 2GT 1030160 FPSR9 285175 FPSGT 1030112 FPSR9 285120 FPSGT 103060 FPSR9 28565 FPSGT 103022 FPSR9 28524 FPS
Cyberpunk 2077GT 1030103 FPSR9 285113 FPSGT 103089 FPSR9 28595 FPSGT 103044 FPSR9 28547 FPSGT 103015 FPSR9 28516 FPS
Forza Horizon 5GT 1030130 FPSR9 285142 FPSGT 103084 FPSR9 28590 FPSGT 103054 FPSR9 28558 FPSGT 103032 FPSR9 28535 FPS
Hogwarts LegacyGT 103084 FPSR9 28592 FPSGT 103070 FPSR9 28575 FPSGT 103039 FPSR9 28542 FPSGT 103015 FPSR9 28516 FPS
H2H workload indices
Comparable internal indices on a fixed 0–100 scale.
H2H Raster IndexH2H Index / 10032346%
H2H Compute IndexH2H Index / 10038373%
H2H Rendering IndexH2H Index / 10039403%
H2H Memory Workload IndexH2H Index / 10056560%
H2H Efficiency IndexH2H Index / 1001006050%
These are versioned H2H calculated indices derived from normalized catalog data. They are not results from a third-party benchmark.
H2H AI workload indices
Estimated workload profiles based on available performance and memory data.
H2H Image Generation IndexH2H Index / 10043442%
H2H ML Training IndexH2H Index / 10041435%
H2H Inference IndexH2H Index / 10039403%
H2H Local LLM IndexH2H Index / 10045462%
H2H Computer Vision IndexH2H Index / 10039403%
These are versioned H2H calculated indices derived from normalized catalog data. They are not results from a third-party benchmark.
Graphics APIs, SDKs and upscaling
DirectX12.112.0
Vulkan1.41.2
OpenGL4.64.6
UpscalingNot supportedNot supported
Compute APIOpenCL 3.0, CUDA 6.1OpenCL 2.1
Architecture and release
ArchitecturePascalGCN 3.0
Process node16 nmBetter28 nm
Release date20172014
Device classDesktopDesktop
GPU cores, die and clocks
Transistor count1800 million5000 millionBetter
Die size74 mm²Better366 mm²
Shader units / cores3841792Better
Base clock1227 MHzBetter918 MHz
Boost clock1519 MHzBetter918 MHz
Board size, power and compatibility
InterfacePCIe 3x4PCIe 3x16
Length145 mmBetter221 mm
ThicknessSingle-slotDual-slot
Recommended PSU200 WBetter450 W
Power connectorNone6+6 pin
Display outputs and limits
HDMIHDMI 2.0HDMI 1.4a
DisplayPortDisplayPort 1.4DisplayPort 1.2
USB Type-CNoNo
Max monitors24
Max resolution7680 × 43204096 × 2160
Memory and compute throughput
VRAM2 GB GDDR52 GB GDDR5
Memory typeGDDR5GDDR5
Memory bus64 bit256 bitBetter
TFLOPS1.1273.29Better
Other comparisons
Reviews and questions
Explain this comparison
Beyond percentages: causes, relevant specifications, and practical impact behind every chart.
What AI will explain
Overall score, radar, FPS, synthetic tests, specifications, efficiency, and value.
Evidence details
Data coverage
- Verified gaming results
- 0
- Verified synthetic results
- 0
- Games with verified results
- 0
- Verified community results
- 0
- Estimated / unverified results
- 32
- Specifications
- 0 / 70
Calculated scores · How is this calculated?
Scores use the catalog model and may include estimated inputs. Open each score to see its origin and the methodology.
clamp(round(performance × 0.7 + (efficiency ?? 50) × 0.2 + (value is missing ? 0 : (value − 50) × 0.2)), 0, 100)Price evidence · View sources (5)
Verified community results
No verified community benchmarks yet.
Reviewed by
No individual editorial review is recorded for this comparison.
Comparison history
Show recorded changes (5)
- · Record updated: products
- · Record updated: products
- · Record changed: product_prices
- · Record updated: products
- · Record updated: products
Why you can trust this comparison
Origin and confidence are evaluated from the evidence attached to each value. Unverified results are identified, and specification, benchmark and price dates remain separate.
Owner experiences
Real builds, results, and community feedback.
Moderator reviewedHelpful to the communityExpert badges
Frequently asked comparison questions
Short recommendations based on performance, memory, power consumption, and intended use.
01Which is better for gaming: GT 1030 or R9 285?+
GT 1030 has the higher overall gaming score, while GT 1030 offers the better price-to-performance ratio. The final choice depends on resolution and settings.
02Which is better for streaming?+
GT 1030 is the stronger streaming choice thanks to performance, hardware encoding, and application support. Check AV1, H.264, and HEVC support before buying.
03Which is better for Blender?+
GT 1030 is generally the better option for Blender and GPU rendering. Rendering-engine support and available VRAM also matter.
04Which is better for video editing?+
GT 1030 offers more overall performance, while GT 1030 offers more memory headroom. Codecs, hardware encoders, and editor optimization can change the result.
05Which is better for neural networks and AI?+
GT 1030 is the more practical option for local AI workloads. VRAM capacity, compute libraries, and framework compatibility are especially important.
06Which is better for 1080p?+
GT 1030 is the most rational 1080p choice, where high frame rates and cost per frame matter most.
07Which is better for 1440p?+
GT 1030 leads in combined 1440p performance. GT 1030 can be preferable for heavy textures and games with high VRAM usage.
08Which is better for 4K?+
GT 1030 is preferable for 4K, where total performance, memory bandwidth, and VRAM capacity have the greatest impact.
09Which is better for a quiet PC?+
GT 1030 is easier to use in a quiet build because of its lower estimated power and thermal load. Actual noise depends on the specific cooler.
10Which is better without replacing the power supply?+
GT 1030 is the safer candidate because its stated power consumption is lower. Verify PSU wattage, age, and power connectors.
11Is it worth upgrading from the previous generation?+
Consider upgrading to GT 1030 if your current device no longer delivers the required FPS, memory capacity, or feature support. A gain below 15–20% is usually worth waiting for a price cut.