Radeon Vega 7 vs HD 8280

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon HD 8280 and Radeon Vega 7, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

HD 8280
2013
15 Watt
0.67

Vega 7 outperforms HD 8280 by a whopping 1013% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1172526
Place by popularitynot in top-10039
Power efficiency3.0911.48
ArchitectureGCN 2.0 (2013−2017)GCN 5.1 (2018−2022)
GPU code nameKalindiCezanne
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date18 September 2013 (11 years ago)13 April 2021 (3 years ago)

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 cores128448
Core clock speed450 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1900 MHz
Number of transistors1,178 million9,800 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt45 Watt
Texture fill rate3.60053.20
Floating-point processing power0.1152 TFLOPS1.702 TFLOPS
ROPs48
TMUs828

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).

InterfaceIGPIGP
WidthIGPIGP
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeSystem SharedSystem Shared
Maximum RAM amountSystem SharedSystem Shared
Memory bus widthSystem SharedSystem Shared
Memory clock speedSystem SharedSystem Shared
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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.36.4
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.02.1
Vulkan1.2.1311.2

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.

HD 8280 0.67
Vega 7 7.46
+1013%

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

HD 8280 496
Vega 7 5249
+958%

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

HD 8280 328
Vega 7 3348
+921%

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

HD 8280 2515
Vega 7 24726
+883%

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 HD2−3
−1050%
23
+1050%
1440p3−4
−1100%
36
+1100%
4K1−2
−1900%
20
+1900%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−900%
30−33
+900%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−900%
40−45
+900%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−900%
30−33
+900%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−900%
30−33
+900%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−900%
10−11
+900%
Hitman 3 5−6
−1000%
55−60
+1000%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−991%
120−130
+991%
Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−983%
65−70
+983%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
−900%
300−310
+900%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−900%
40−45
+900%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−900%
30−33
+900%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−900%
30−33
+900%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−900%
10−11
+900%
Hitman 3 5−6
−1000%
55−60
+1000%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−991%
120−130
+991%
Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−983%
65−70
+983%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−1000%
110−120
+1000%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
−900%
300−310
+900%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−900%
40−45
+900%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−900%
30−33
+900%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−900%
30−33
+900%
Hitman 3 5−6
−1000%
55−60
+1000%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−991%
120−130
+991%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−983%
65−70
+983%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−1000%
110−120
+1000%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
−900%
300−310
+900%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 0−1

1440p
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−900%
10−11
+900%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−900%
10−11
+900%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−900%
10−11
+900%
Hitman 3 6−7
−983%
65−70
+983%
Horizon Zero Dawn 3−4
−900%
30−33
+900%
Watch Dogs: Legion 2−3
−950%
21−24
+950%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−900%
30−33
+900%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−900%
10−11
+900%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−950%
21−24
+950%

This is how HD 8280 and Vega 7 compete in popular games:

  • Vega 7 is 1050% faster in 1080p
  • Vega 7 is 1100% faster in 1440p
  • Vega 7 is 1900% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.67 7.46
Recency 18 September 2013 13 April 2021
Chip lithography 28 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 45 Watt

HD 8280 has 200% lower power consumption.

Vega 7, on the other hand, has a 1013.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, and a 300% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon Vega 7 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 8280 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.


AMD Radeon HD 8280
Radeon HD 8280
AMD Radeon Vega 7
Radeon Vega 7

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.


2.2 14 votes

Rate Radeon HD 8280 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 1889 votes

Rate Radeon Vega 7 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.