Radeon RX 7900 GRE vs HD 8280E

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon HD 8280E with Radeon RX 7900 GRE, including specs and performance data.

HD 8280E
2013
15 Watt
0.71
RX 7900 GRE
2023, $549
16 GB GDDR6, 260 Watt
65.63
+9144%

7900 GRE outperforms HD 8280E by a whopping 9144% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking124628
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data71.06
Power efficiency3.6919.66
ArchitectureGCN 2.0 (2013−2017)RDNA 3.0 (2022−2026)
GPU code nameKalindiNavi 31
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date23 April 2013 (13 years ago)27 July 2023 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$549

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 cores1285120
Core clock speed450 MHz1287 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2245 MHz
Number of transistors1,178 million57,700 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt260 Watt
Texture fill rate3.600718.4
Floating-point processing power0.1152 TFLOPS45.98 TFLOPS
ROPs4160
TMUs8320
Ray Tracing Coresno data80
L0 Cacheno data2.5 MB
L1 Cacheno data2.5 MB
L2 Cacheno data6 MB
L3 Cacheno data64 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).

InterfaceIGPPCIe 4.0 x16
Lengthno data276 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data2x 8-pin

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 typeSystem SharedGDDR6
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared16 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared256 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared2250 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data576.0 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 ConnectorsNo outputs1x HDMI 2.1a, 2x DisplayPort 2.1, 1x USB Type-C
HDMI-+

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (12_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.36.8
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.02.2
Vulkan1.2.1311.3

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.

HD 8280E 0.71
RX 7900 GRE 65.63
+9144%

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.

HD 8280E 296
Samples: 25
RX 7900 GRE 27460
+9177%
Samples: 2176

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 HD2−3206
+10200%
1440p1−2129
+12800%
4K0−177

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data2.67
1440pno data4.26
4Kno data7.13

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Atomic Heart 303 303
Counter-Strike 2 300−350 300−350
Cyberpunk 2077 208 208

Full HD
Medium

Atomic Heart 232 232
Battlefield 5 170−180 170−180
Counter-Strike 2 300−350 300−350
Cyberpunk 2077 184 184
Far Cry 5 174 174
Fortnite 300−350 300−350
Forza Horizon 4 260−270 260−270
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
Valorant 350−400 350−400

Full HD
High

Atomic Heart 150 150
Battlefield 5 170−180 170−180
Counter-Strike 2 300−350 300−350
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280 270−280
Cyberpunk 2077 158 158
Far Cry 5 168 168
Far Cry 6 169 169
Fortnite 300−350 300−350
Forza Horizon 4 260−270 260−270
Grand Theft Auto V 164 164
Metro Exodus 179 179
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 382 382
Valorant 350−400 350−400

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 170−180 170−180
Cyberpunk 2077 148 148
Far Cry 5 155 155
Forza Horizon 4 260−270 260−270
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 209 209
Valorant 350−400 350−400

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 300−350 300−350

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 200−210 200−210
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 500−550 500−550
Far Cry 6 136 136
Grand Theft Auto V 130 130
Metro Exodus 111 111
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
Valorant 450−500 450−500

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 160−170 160−170
Cyberpunk 2077 98 98
Far Cry 5 154 154
Forza Horizon 4 220−230 220−230
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 156 156

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 150−160 150−160

4K
High

Atomic Heart 60−65 60−65
Counter-Strike 2 90−95 90−95
Far Cry 6 87 87
Grand Theft Auto V 151 151
Metro Exodus 71 71
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 125 125
Valorant 300−350 300−350

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 120−130 120−130
Counter-Strike 2 90−95 90−95
Cyberpunk 2077 45 45
Far Cry 5 107 107
Forza Horizon 4 170−180 170−180
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 95−100 95−100

4K
Epic

Fortnite 75−80 75−80

This is how HD 8280E and RX 7900 GRE compete in popular games:

  • RX 7900 GRE is 10200% faster in 1080p
  • RX 7900 GRE is 12800% faster in 1440p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 61 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.71 65.63
Recency 23 April 2013 27 July 2023
Chip lithography 28 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 260 Watt

HD 8280E has 94% lower power consumption.

RX 7900 GRE, on the other hand, has a 9144% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, and a 82% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 7900 GRE is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 8280E in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon HD 8280E is a notebook graphics card while Radeon RX 7900 GRE is a desktop 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.


3.1 15 votes

Rate Radeon HD 8280E on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.5 1251 votes

Rate Radeon RX 7900 GRE on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon HD 8280E or Radeon RX 7900 GRE, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.