GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile vs Radeon R9 280

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 280 with GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile, including specs and performance data.

R9 280
2014
3 GB GDDR5, 200 Watt
14.40
+23.7%

R9 280 outperforms GTX 1050 Mobile by a significant 24% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking360409
Place by popularitynot in top-10094
Cost-effectiveness evaluation5.28no data
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2012−2020)Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code nameTahitiGP107B
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Designreferenceno data
Release date4 March 2014 (10 years ago)3 January 2017 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$279 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores1792640
CUDA coresno data640
Core clock speedno data1354 MHz
Boost clock speed933 MHz1493 MHz
Number of transistors4,313 million3,300 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)200 Watt75 Watt
Maximum GPU temperatureno data97 °C
Texture fill rate104.559.72
Floating-point performance3.344 gflops1.911 gflops

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).

Laptop sizeno datalarge
Bus supportPCIe 3.0PCIe 3.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length275 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1 x 6-pin + 1 x 8-pinno data

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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount3 GB4000 MB
Memory bus width384 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1250 MHz7008 MHz
Memory bandwidth240 GB/s112 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-DisplayPortDP 1.4, HDMI 2.0b, Dual Link-DVI
Multi monitor supportno data+
Eyefinity+-
HDMI+-
HDCP-2.2
G-SYNC support-+

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
GameStream-+
GPU Boostno data3.0
Ansel-+

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212 (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.4
OpenGL4.64.5
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan+1.2.131
CUDA-+

Synthetic benchmark performance

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


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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 14.40
+23.7%
GTX 1050 Mobile 11.64

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
+32.2%
GTX 1050 Mobile 6068

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:

900p90−95
+23.3%
73
−23.3%
Full HD55−60
+19.6%
46
−19.6%
1440p27−30
+12.5%
24
−12.5%
4K18−20
+20%
15
−20%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 37
+0%
37
+0%
Battlefield 5 51
+0%
51
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 40
+0%
40
+0%
Far Cry 5 39
+0%
39
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 38
+0%
38
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 55
+0%
55
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 27
+0%
27
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 33
+0%
33
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30
+0%
30
+0%
Battlefield 5 44
+0%
44
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 33
+0%
33
+0%
Far Cry 5 36
+0%
36
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 37
+0%
37
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 52
+0%
52
+0%
Metro Exodus 19
+0%
19
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 14
+0%
14
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 29
+0%
29
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 39
+0%
39
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18
+0%
18
+0%
Battlefield 5 37
+0%
37
+0%
Far Cry 5 33
+0%
33
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 33
+0%
33
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 37
+0%
37
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 22
+0%
22
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18
+0%
18
+0%
Metro Exodus 11
+0%
11
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 17
+0%
17
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 13
+0%
13
+0%
Battlefield 5 26
+0%
26
+0%
Far Cry 5 21
+0%
21
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 24
+0%
24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 26
+0%
26
+0%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10
+0%
10
+0%
Metro Exodus 7
+0%
7
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8
+0%
8
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7
+0%
7
+0%
Battlefield 5 13
+0%
13
+0%
Far Cry 5 11
+0%
11
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 11
+0%
11
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 15
+0%
15
+0%

This is how R9 280 and GTX 1050 Mobile compete in popular games:

  • R9 280 is 23% faster in 900p
  • R9 280 is 20% faster in 1080p
  • R9 280 is 13% faster in 1440p
  • R9 280 is 20% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 43 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 14.40 11.64
Recency 4 March 2014 3 January 2017
Maximum RAM amount 3 GB 4000 MB
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 200 Watt 75 Watt

R9 280 has a 23.7% higher aggregate performance score.

GTX 1050 Mobile, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, a 30.2% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 166.7% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R9 280 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R9 280 is a desktop card while GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile is a notebook one.


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
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile
GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile

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.


3.6 383 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 1137 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile 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.