GeForce GTX 460 vs Radeon R9 280

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 280 and GeForce GTX 460, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

R9 280
2014
3 GB GDDR5, 200 Watt
14.40
+145%

R9 280 outperforms GTX 460 by a whopping 145% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking359587
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation5.271.16
Power efficiency5.182.64
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)Fermi (2010−2014)
GPU code nameTahitiGF104
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Designreferenceno data
Release date4 March 2014 (10 years ago)12 July 2010 (14 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$279 $199

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

R9 280 has 354% better value for money than GTX 460.

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 cores1792336
Core clock speedno data675 MHz
Boost clock speed933 MHzno data
Number of transistors4,313 million1,950 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)200 Watt160 Watt
Texture fill rate104.537.80
Floating-point processing power3.344 TFLOPS0.9072 TFLOPS
ROPs3224
TMUs11256

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 3.016x PCI-E 2.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length275 mm210 mm
Heightno data4.376"(111 mm) (11.1 cm)
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors1 x 6-pin + 1 x 8-pin2x 6-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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount3 GB2 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit192 Bit
Memory clock speed1250 MHz900 MHz
Memory bandwidth240 GB/s86.4 GB/s

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-DisplayPortTwo Dual Link DVI, Mini HDMI
Multi monitor supportno data+
Eyefinity+-
HDMI++
HDCP-+
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536
Audio input for HDMIno dataInternal

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 (11_0)
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.64.1
OpenCL1.21.1
Vulkan+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.

R9 280 14.40
+145%
GTX 460 5.87

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 5557
+146%
GTX 460 2263

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
+212%
GTX 460 2570

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 14.40 5.87
Recency 4 March 2014 12 July 2010
Maximum RAM amount 3 GB 2 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 200 Watt 160 Watt

R9 280 has a 145.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 50% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

GTX 460, on the other hand, has 25% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R9 280 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 460 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
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460
GeForce GTX 460

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.


3.6 384 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 984 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 460 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.