Radeon Graphics vs GeForce GTX 280

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 280 and Radeon Graphics, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTX 280
2008
1 GB GDDR3, 236 Watt
3.37
+70.2%

GTX 280 outperforms Graphics by an impressive 70% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking734897
Place by popularitynot in top-10010
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.11no data
Power efficiency1.009.20
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)GCN 5.1 (2018−2022)
GPU code nameGT200Renoir
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date16 June 2008 (16 years ago)no data (2024 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$649 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores240448
Core clock speed602 MHzno data
Boost clock speedno data1500 MHz
Number of transistors1,400 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology65 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)236 Watt15 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature105 °Cno data
Texture fill rate48.1642.00
Floating-point processing power0.6221 TFLOPS1.344 TFLOPS
ROPs328
TMUs8028

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).

InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16IGP
Length267 mmno data
Height4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slotIGP
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pinno data
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 typeGDDR3System Shared
Maximum RAM amount1 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width512 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1107 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth141.7 GB/sno data

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 ConnectorsHDTVDual Link DVINo outputs
Multi monitor support+no data
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIS/PDIFno data

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model4.0no data
OpenGL2.14.6
OpenCL1.1no data
VulkanN/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 280 3.37
+70.2%
Radeon Graphics 1.98

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 280 1299
+70%
Radeon Graphics 764

Gaming performance

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

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.37 1.98
Chip lithography 65 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 236 Watt 15 Watt

GTX 280 has a 70.2% higher aggregate performance score.

Graphics, on the other hand, has a 828.6% more advanced lithography process, and 1473.3% lower power consumption.

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


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

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce GTX 280
GeForce GTX 280
AMD Radeon Graphics
Radeon Graphics

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.6 105 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 280 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 6238 votes

Rate Radeon Graphics on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.