GeForce GTX 280 vs GTX 1080

Place in the ranking	103	740
Place by popularity	63	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	19.33	0.12
Power efficiency	15.48	0.97
Architecture	Pascal (2016−2021)	Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)
GPU code name	GP104	GT200
Market segment	Desktop	Desktop
Release date	27 May 2016 (8 years ago)	16 June 2008 (16 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$599	$649

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTX 1080 has 16008% better value for money than GTX 280.

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	2560	240
Core clock speed	1607 MHz	602 MHz
Boost clock speed	1733 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	7,200 million	1,400 million
Manufacturing process technology	16 nm	65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	180 Watt	236 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature	94 °C	105 °C
Texture fill rate	277.3	48.16
Floating-point processing power	8.873 TFLOPS	0.6221 TFLOPS
ROPs	64	32
TMUs	160	80

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Bus support	PCIe 3.0	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 2.0 x16
Length	267 mm	267 mm
Height	4.376" (11.1 cm)	4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)
Width	2-slot	2-slot
Recommended system power (PSU)	500 Watt	no data
Supplementary power connectors	1x 8-pin	1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin
SLI options	+	+

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory type	GDDR5X	GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	1 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	512 Bit
Memory clock speed	10 GB/s	1107 MHz
Memory bandwidth	320 GB/s	141.7 GB/s
Shared memory	-	-

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors	DP 1.42, HDMI 2.0b, DL-DVI	HDTVDual Link DVI
Multi monitor support	+	+
HDMI	+	-
Maximum VGA resolution	no data	2048x1536
G-SYNC support	+	-
Audio input for HDMI	no data	S/PDIF

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

GPU Boost	3.0	no data
VR Ready	+	no data
Ansel	+	no data

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX	12 (12_1)	11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model	6.4	4.0
OpenGL	4.5	2.1
OpenCL	1.2	1.1
Vulkan	1.2.131	N/A
CUDA	+	+

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

GTX 1080 40.47
+1112%

GTX 280 3.34

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

GTX 1080 15557
+1111%

GTX 280 1285

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD	126 +1160%	10−12 −1160%
1440p	75 +1150%	6−7 −1150%
4K	60 +1400%	4−5 −1400%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	4.75 +1265%	64.90 −1265%
1440p	7.99 +1254%	108.17 −1254%
4K	9.98 +1525%	162.25 −1525%

GTX 1080 has 1265% lower cost per frame in 1080p
GTX 1080 has 1254% lower cost per frame in 1440p
GTX 1080 has 1525% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	85−90 +1114%	7−8 −1114%
Cyberpunk 2077	85−90 +1143%	7−8 −1143%
Elden Ring	140−150 +1330%	10−11 −1330%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	84 +1300%	6−7 −1300%
Counter-Strike 2	85−90 +1114%	7−8 −1114%
Cyberpunk 2077	85−90 +1143%	7−8 −1143%
Forza Horizon 4	190−200 +1138%	16−18 −1138%
Metro Exodus	111 +1133%	9−10 −1133%
Red Dead Redemption 2	114 +1167%	9−10 −1167%
Valorant	160−170 +1250%	12−14 −1250%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	130 +1200%	10−11 −1200%
Counter-Strike 2	85−90 +1114%	7−8 −1114%
Cyberpunk 2077	85−90 +1143%	7−8 −1143%
Dota 2	113 +1156%	9−10 −1156%
Elden Ring	140−150 +1330%	10−11 −1330%
Far Cry 5	75 +1150%	6−7 −1150%
Fortnite	158 +1217%	12−14 −1217%
Forza Horizon 4	190−200 +1138%	16−18 −1138%
Grand Theft Auto V	119 +1222%	9−10 −1222%
Metro Exodus	83 +1283%	6−7 −1283%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	242 +1244%	18−20 −1244%
Red Dead Redemption 2	53 +1225%	4−5 −1225%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	142 +1320%	10−11 −1320%
Valorant	160−170 +1250%	12−14 −1250%
World of Tanks	272 +1195%	21−24 −1195%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	73 +1117%	6−7 −1117%
Counter-Strike 2	47 +1467%	3−4 −1467%
Cyberpunk 2077	85−90 +1143%	7−8 −1143%
Dota 2	100 +1150%	8−9 −1150%
Far Cry 5	179 +1179%	14−16 −1179%
Forza Horizon 4	190−200 +1138%	16−18 −1138%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	88 +1157%	7−8 −1157%
Valorant	160−170 +1250%	12−14 −1250%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	72 +1340%	5−6 −1340%
Elden Ring	80−85 +1283%	6−7 −1283%
Grand Theft Auto V	72 +1340%	5−6 −1340%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 +1150%	14−16 −1150%
Red Dead Redemption 2	35 +1650%	2−3 −1650%
World of Tanks	250−260 +1119%	21−24 −1119%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	72 +1340%	5−6 −1340%
Counter-Strike 2	28 +1300%	2−3 −1300%
Cyberpunk 2077	40−45 +1300%	3−4 −1300%
Far Cry 5	118 +1211%	9−10 −1211%
Forza Horizon 4	110−120 +1211%	9−10 −1211%
Metro Exodus	82 +1267%	6−7 −1267%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	70−75 +1320%	5−6 −1320%
Valorant	120−130 +1190%	10−11 −1190%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	40−45 +1300%	3−4 −1300%
Dota 2	74 +1133%	6−7 −1133%
Elden Ring	40−45 +1233%	3−4 −1233%
Grand Theft Auto V	74 +1133%	6−7 −1133%
Metro Exodus	28 +1300%	2−3 −1300%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	106 +1225%	8−9 −1225%
Red Dead Redemption 2	21 +2000%	1−2 −2000%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	74 +1133%	6−7 −1133%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	42 +1300%	3−4 −1300%
Counter-Strike 2	40−45 +1300%	3−4 −1300%
Cyberpunk 2077	18−20 +1700%	1−2 −1700%
Dota 2	129 +1190%	10−11 −1190%
Far Cry 5	59 +1375%	4−5 −1375%
Fortnite	54 +1250%	4−5 −1250%
Forza Horizon 4	65−70 +1240%	5−6 −1240%
Valorant	65−70 +1260%	5−6 −1260%

This is how GTX 1080 and GTX 280 compete in popular games:

GTX 1080 is 1160% faster in 1080p
GTX 1080 is 1150% faster in 1440p
GTX 1080 is 1400% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	40.47	3.34
Recency	27 May 2016	16 June 2008
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	1 GB
Chip lithography	16 nm	65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	180 Watt	236 Watt

GTX 1080 has a 1111.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 306.3% more advanced lithography process, and 31.1% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 1080 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 280 in performance tests.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.