Arc A750 vs Radeon R9 280

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 280 and Arc A750, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

R9 280
2014
3 GB GDDR5, 200 Watt
14.42

Arc A750 outperforms R9 280 by a whopping 118% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking365177
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation5.4156.31
Power efficiency4.949.57
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code nameTahitiDG2-512
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Designreferenceno data
Release date4 March 2014 (10 years ago)12 October 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$279 $289

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

Arc A750 has 941% better value for money than R9 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 cores17923584
Core clock speedno data2050 MHz
Boost clock speed933 MHz2400 MHz
Number of transistors4,313 million21,700 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)200 Watt225 Watt
Texture fill rate104.5537.6
Floating-point processing power3.344 TFLOPS17.2 TFLOPS
ROPs32112
TMUs112224
Tensor Coresno data448
Ray Tracing Coresno data28

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 supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Length275 mmno data
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors1 x 6-pin + 1 x 8-pin1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin

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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount3 GB8 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1250 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth240 GB/s512.0 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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 2x mini-DisplayPort1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 2.0
Eyefinity+-
HDMI++

Supported technologies

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

CrossFire+-
FreeSync+-
HD3D+-
LiquidVR+-
TressFX+-
TrueAudio+-
UVD+-
DDMA audio+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.16.6
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.23.0
Vulkan+1.3

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.

R9 280 14.42
Arc A750 31.41
+118%

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.

R9 280 5558
Arc A750 12102
+118%

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.

R9 280 8020
Arc A750 29667
+270%

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 HD45−50
−140%
108
+140%
1440p24−27
−142%
58
+142%
4K16−18
−119%
35
+119%

Cost per frame, $

1080p6.202.68
1440p11.634.98
4K17.448.26

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 62
+0%
62
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 90
+0%
90
+0%
Battlefield 5 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Far Cry 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%
Hitman 3 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Metro Exodus 144
+0%
144
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 106
+0%
106
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 76
+0%
76
+0%
Battlefield 5 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Far Cry 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%
Hitman 3 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Metro Exodus 143
+0%
143
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 239
+0%
239
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 45
+0%
45
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 69
+0%
69
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Far Cry 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 90
+0%
90
+0%
Hitman 3 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 113
+0%
113
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 199
+0%
199
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 69
+0%
69
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 63
+0%
63
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 38
+0%
38
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 54
+0%
54
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Far Cry 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 230−240
+0%
230−240
+0%
Hitman 3 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 92
+0%
92
+0%
Metro Exodus 86
+0%
86
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 145
+0%
145
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 57
+0%
57
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Hitman 3 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%
Metro Exodus 80
+0%
80
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 69
+0%
69
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 28
+0%
28
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30
+0%
30
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 61
+0%
61
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 84
+0%
84
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30
+0%
30
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

This is how R9 280 and Arc A750 compete in popular games:

  • Arc A750 is 140% faster in 1080p
  • Arc A750 is 142% faster in 1440p
  • Arc A750 is 119% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 66 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 14.42 31.41
Recency 4 March 2014 12 October 2022
Maximum RAM amount 3 GB 8 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 200 Watt 225 Watt

R9 280 has 12.5% lower power consumption.

Arc A750, on the other hand, has a 117.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 166.7% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 366.7% more advanced lithography process.

The Arc A750 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R9 280 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 R9 280
Radeon R9 280
Intel Arc A750
Arc A750

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.


3.6 399 votes

Rate Radeon R9 280 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 852 votes

Rate Arc A750 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.