GeForce RTX 4060 vs GTX 280

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 280 and GeForce RTX 4060, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

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

RTX 4060 outperforms GTX 280 by a whopping 1409% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking82383
Place by popularitynot in top-1009
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.1190.86
Power efficiency1.0231.53
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code nameGT200AD107
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date16 June 2008 (18 years ago)18 May 2023 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$649 $299

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

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

RTX 4060 has 82500% better value for money than GTX 280.

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 cores2403072
Core clock speed602 MHz1830 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2460 MHz
Number of transistors1,400 million18,900 million
Manufacturing process technology65 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)236 Watt115 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature105 °Cno data
Texture fill rate48.16236.2
Floating-point processing power0.6221 TFLOPS15.11 TFLOPS
ROPs3248
TMUs8096
Tensor Coresno data96
Ray Tracing Coresno data24
L1 Cacheno data3 MB
L2 Cache256 KB24 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 x16PCIe 4.0 x8
Length267 mm240 mm
Height4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin1x 12-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 typeGDDR3GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount1 GB8 GB
Memory bus width512 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1107 MHz2125 MHz
Memory bandwidth141.7 GB/s272.0 GB/s
Shared memory--
Resizable BAR-+

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 DVI1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a
Multi monitor support+no data
HDMI-+
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 Model4.06.8
OpenGL2.14.6
OpenCL1.13.0
VulkanN/A1.3
CUDA+8.9
DLSS-+

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
RTX 4060 46.77
+1409%

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
RTX 4060 19484
+1407%
Samples: 28797

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
−93.5%
123
1440p3−459
+1867%
4K2−337
+1750%

Cost per frame, $

1080p81.132.43
+97%
1440p216.335.07
+97.7%
4K324.508.08
+97.5%
  • RTX 4060 has 97% lower cost per frame in 1080p
  • RTX 4060 has 98% lower cost per frame in 1440p
  • RTX 4060 has 98% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Atomic Heart 213 213
Counter-Strike 2 250−260 250−260
Cyberpunk 2077 139 139
Resident Evil 4 Remake 154 154

Full HD
Medium

Atomic Heart 159 159
Battlefield 5 140−150 140−150
Counter-Strike 2 250−260 250−260
Cyberpunk 2077 107 107
Far Cry 5 185 185
Fortnite 200−210 200−210
Forza Horizon 4 180−190 180−190
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
Valorant 270−280 270−280

Full HD
High

Atomic Heart 94 94
Battlefield 5 140−150 140−150
Counter-Strike 2 250−260 250−260
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280 270−280
Cyberpunk 2077 90 90
Far Cry 5 169 169
Fortnite 200−210 200−210
Forza Horizon 4 180−190 180−190
Grand Theft Auto V 155 155
Metro Exodus 107 107
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 216 216
Valorant 270−280 270−280

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 140−150 140−150
Cyberpunk 2077 80 80
Far Cry 5 159 159
Forza Horizon 4 180−190 180−190
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 111 111
Valorant 270−280 270−280

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 200−210 200−210

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 120−130 120−130
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 300−350 300−350
Grand Theft Auto V 90 90
Metro Exodus 63 63
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
Valorant 300−350 300−350

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 110−120 110−120
Cyberpunk 2077 48 48
Far Cry 5 109 109
Forza Horizon 4 140−150 140−150
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 80 80

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 120−130 120−130

4K
High

Atomic Heart 35−40 35−40
Counter-Strike 2 55−60 55−60
Grand Theft Auto V 89 89
Metro Exodus 38 38
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 66 66
Valorant 280−290 280−290

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 75−80 75−80
Counter-Strike 2 55−60 55−60
Cyberpunk 2077 20 20
Far Cry 5 54 54
Forza Horizon 4 95−100 95−100
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 70−75 70−75

4K
Epic

Fortnite 65−70 65−70

This is how GTX 280 and RTX 4060 compete in popular games:

  • RTX 4060 is 1438% faster in 1080p
  • RTX 4060 is 1867% faster in 1440p
  • RTX 4060 is 1750% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 59 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.10 46.77
Recency 16 June 2008 18 May 2023
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 8 GB
Chip lithography 65 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 236 Watt 115 Watt

RTX 4060 has a 1409% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 14 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 92% more advanced lithography process, and 51% lower power consumption.

The GeForce RTX 4060 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 280 in performance tests.

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
4.1 30783 votes

Rate GeForce RTX 4060 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 GeForce RTX 4060, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.