Arc B390 vs GeForce GTX 280

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 280 with Arc B390, including specs and performance data.

GTX 280
2008, $649
1 GB GDDR3, 236 Watt
3.10

B390 outperforms GTX 280 by a whopping 592% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking818300
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.11no data
Power efficiency1.0220.75
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)Xe3-LPG (2026)
GPU code nameGT200Panther Lake
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date16 June 2008 (18 years ago)27 January 2026 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$649 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

Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores2401536
Core clock speed602 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2500 MHz
Number of transistors1,400 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology65 nm3 nm
Power consumption (TDP)236 Watt80 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature105 °Cno data
Texture fill rate48.16120.0
Floating-point processing power0.6221 TFLOPS7.68 TFLOPS
ROPs3224
TMUs8048
Ray Tracing Coresno data12
L1 Cacheno data768 KB
L2 Cache256 KB16 MB

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).

InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16IGP
Length267 mmno data
Height4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 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 typeGDDR3System Shared
Maximum RAM amount1 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width512 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1107 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth141.7 GB/sno data
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 ConnectorsHDTVDual Link DVIPortable Device Dependent
Multi monitor support+no data
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIS/PDIFno data

API and SDK support

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model4.06.9
OpenGL2.14.6
OpenCL1.13.0
VulkanN/A1.4
CUDA+-

Synthetic benchmarks

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.

GTX 280 3.10
Arc B390 21.46
+592%

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.

GTX 280 1293
Samples: 457
Arc B390 8940
+591%
Samples: 395

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 HD8−9
−613%
57
+613%
1440p5−6
−620%
36
+620%
4K3−4
−700%
24
+700%

Cost per frame, $

1080p81.13no data
1440p129.80no data
4K216.33no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Palworld 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Far Cry 5 87
+0%
87
+0%
Fortnite 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Palworld 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Valorant 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 27
+0%
27
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 240−250
+0%
240−250
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Far Cry 5 79
+0%
79
+0%
Fortnite 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 73
+0%
73
+0%
Metro Exodus 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Palworld 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 107
+0%
107
+0%
Valorant 149
+0%
149
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Far Cry 5 73
+0%
73
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 47
+0%
47
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Palworld 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 41
+0%
41
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 31
+0%
31
+0%
Metro Exodus 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Valorant 96
+0%
96
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Far Cry 5 53
+0%
53
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Palworld 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 18
+0%
18
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Metro Exodus 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Valorant 45
+0%
45
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Palworld 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

This is how GTX 280 and Arc B390 compete in popular games:

  • Arc B390 is 613% faster in 1080p
  • Arc B390 is 620% faster in 1440p
  • Arc B390 is 700% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 58 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.10 21.46
Recency 16 June 2008 27 January 2026
Chip lithography 65 nm 3 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 236 Watt 80 Watt

Arc B390 has a 592% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 17 years, a 2067% more advanced lithography process, and 195% lower power consumption.

The Arc B390 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 280 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 280 is a desktop graphics card while Arc B390 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.

Community ratings

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


3.5 120 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 280 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 25 votes

Rate Arc B390 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GTX 280 or Arc B390, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.