Radeon HD 6570M vs R9 280

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
HD 7870 XT HD 7950 HD 7950 Mac Edition HD 7950 Monica BIOS 1 HD 7950 Monica BIOS 2 HD 7970 HD 7970 GHz Edition HD 8950 OEM HD 8970 OEM R9 280 R9 280X R9 280X2
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
6510G2 6515G2 6520G 6520G + HD 7450M Dual Graphics 6530M 6540G2 6545G2 6550A 6550M 6570M 6570M Mac Edition

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 280 with Radeon HD 6570M, including specs and performance data.

R9 280
2014, $279
3 GB GDDR5, 200 Watt
13.22
+879%

R9 280 outperforms HD 6570M by a whopping 879% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Share:
R9 280 R9 280
HD 6570M HD 6570M

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking4191055
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation4.69no data
Power efficiency5.093.47
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2012−2020)TeraScale 2 (2009−2015)
GPU code nameTahitiCapilano
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Designreferenceno data
Release date4 March 2014 (12 years ago)26 November 2010 (15 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$279 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

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 cores1792400
Core clock speedno data650 MHz
Boost clock speed933 MHzno data
Number of transistors4,313 million627 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)200 Watt30 Watt
Texture fill rate104.513.00
Floating-point processing power3.344 TFLOPS0.52 TFLOPS
ROPs328
TMUs11220
L1 Cache448 KB40 KB
L2 Cache768 KB256 KB

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 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16MXM-II
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 GB1 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1250 MHz900 MHz
Memory bandwidth240 GB/s57.6 GB/s
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 2x mini-DisplayPortNo outputs
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 and SDK support

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

DirectXDirectX® 1211.2 (11_0)
Shader Model5.15.0
OpenGL4.64.4
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan+N/A

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 HD230−240
+858%
24
−858%

Cost per frame, $

1080p1.21no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 0−1 0−1

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Fortnite 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Valorant 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Dota 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Fortnite 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Metro Exodus 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Valorant 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Dota 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Valorant 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

4K
Ultra

Dota 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

This is how R9 280 and HD 6570M compete in popular games:

  • R9 280 is 858% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 44 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 13.22 1.35
Recency 4 March 2014 26 November 2010
Maximum RAM amount 3 GB 1 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 200 Watt 30 Watt

R9 280 has a 879% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 200% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 43% more advanced lithography process.

HD 6570M, on the other hand, has 567% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R9 280 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 6570M in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R9 280 is a desktop graphics card while Radeon HD 6570M is a notebook one.

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

R9 280 Radeon R9 280
vs
GTX 690 GeForce GTX 690
HD 6570M Radeon HD 6570M
vs
R5 (Stoney Ridge) Radeon R5 (Stoney Ridge)
R9 280 Radeon R9 280
vs
Arc A310 Arc A310
R5 230 Radeon R5 230
vs
Pro WX 4200 Radeon Pro WX 4200
R5 230 Radeon R5 230
vs
Pro WX 8200 Radeon Pro WX 8200
R5 230 Radeon R5 230
vs
RTX 2070 Mobile Refresh GeForce RTX 2070 Mobile Refresh
R5 230 Radeon R5 230
vs
Millennium G450 x2 MMS
R5 230 Radeon R5 230
vs
Steam Machine GPU Steam Machine GPU
R9 280 Radeon R9 280
vs
HD 6530M Radeon HD 6530M
R9 280 Radeon R9 280
vs
HD 6510G2 Radeon HD 6510G2
R9 280 Radeon R9 280
vs
HD 6550A Radeon HD 6550A
R9 280 Radeon R9 280
vs
ATI HD 2400 Radeon HD 2400
R9 280 Radeon R9 280
vs
ATI X800 XT Mac Edition Radeon X800 XT Mac Edition

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.

3.6 444 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 7 votes

Rate Radeon HD 6570M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R9 280 or Radeon HD 6570M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.