GeForce GTX 860M vs Radeon R9 280

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 280 with GeForce GTX 860M, including specs and performance data.

R9 280
2014
3 GB GDDR5, 200 Watt
14.41
+82.2%

R9 280 outperforms GTX 860M by an impressive 82% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking361515
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation5.29no data
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2012−2020)Maxwell (2014−2018)
GPU code nameTahitiN15P-GX
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Designreferenceno data
Release date4 March 2014 (10 years ago)12 March 2014 (10 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 data1152 or 640
Core clock speedno data797 MHz
Boost clock speed933 MHzno data
Number of transistors4,313 million1,870 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)200 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rate104.543.40
Floating-point performance3.344 gflops1.389 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 datamedium sized
Bus supportPCIe 3.0PCI Express 2.0, PCI Express 3.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16MXM-B (3.0)
Length275 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1 x 6-pin + 1 x 8-pinNone
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 GB4 GB
Standard memory configurationno dataGDDR5
Memory bus width384 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1250 MHzUp to 2500 MHz
Memory bandwidth240 GB/s80.0 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-DisplayPortNo outputs
Eyefinity+-
eDP 1.2 signal supportno dataUp to 3840x2160
LVDS signal supportno dataUp to 1920x1200
VGA аnalog display supportno dataUp to 2048x1536
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) supportno dataUp to 3840x2160
HDMI++
HDCP content protection-+
7.1 channel HD audio on HDMI-+
TrueHD and DTS-HD audio bitstreaming-+

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
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder-+
Optimus-+
Ansel-+

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212 (11_0)
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.64.5
OpenCL1.21.1
Vulkan+1.1.126
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 14.41
+82.2%
GTX 860M 7.91

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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
+82.2%
GTX 860M 3050

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
+105%
GTX 860M 3904

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 HD65−70
+80.6%
36
−80.6%
4K21−24
+61.5%
13
−61.5%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Battlefield 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Hitman 3 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Metro Exodus 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Battlefield 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Hitman 3 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Metro Exodus 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 60
+0%
60
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Hitman 3 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12
+0%
12
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Hitman 3 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Metro Exodus 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Hitman 3 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Metro Exodus 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

This is how R9 280 and GTX 860M compete in popular games:

  • R9 280 is 81% faster in 1080p
  • R9 280 is 62% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 72 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 14.41 7.91
Maximum RAM amount 3 GB 4 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 200 Watt 75 Watt

R9 280 has a 82.2% higher aggregate performance score.

GTX 860M, on the other hand, has a 33.3% higher maximum VRAM amount, and 166.7% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R9 280 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 860M in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R9 280 is a desktop card while GeForce GTX 860M 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 860M
GeForce GTX 860M

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
3.7 437 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 860M 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.