Graphics 4 Xe3 Panther Lake iGPU vs Radeon R9 280

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 280 with Graphics 4 Xe3 Panther Lake iGPU, including specs and performance data.

R9 280
2014, $279
3 GB GDDR5, 200 Watt
13.26
+20.2%

R9 280 outperforms Graphics 4 Xe3 Panther Lake iGPU by a significant 20% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking427475
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation4.75no data
Power efficiency5.13no data
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2012−2020)no data
GPU code nameTahitiPanther Lake
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Designreferenceno data
Release date4 March 2014 (12 years ago)5 January 2026 (less than a year 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

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 cores179232
Boost clock speed933 MHz2450 MHz
Number of transistors4,313 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nmno data
Power consumption (TDP)200 Wattno data
Texture fill rate104.5no data
Floating-point processing power3.344 TFLOPSno data
ROPs32no data
TMUs112no data
L1 Cache448 KBno data
L2 Cache768 KB4 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).

Bus supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16no data
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 typeGDDR5no data
Maximum RAM amount3 GBno data
Memory bus width384 Bitno data
Memory clock speed1250 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth240 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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 2x mini-DisplayPortno data
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® 12no data
Shader Model5.1no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL1.2no data
Vulkan+-

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.

R9 280 13.26
+20.2%
Graphics 4 Xe3 Panther Lake iGPU 11.03

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
+17.3%
Graphics 4 Xe3 Panther Lake iGPU 6837

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 HD35−40
+12.9%
31
−12.9%

Cost per frame, $

1080p7.97no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 79
+0%
79
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Palworld 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 59
+0%
59
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Fortnite 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Palworld 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Valorant 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 27
+0%
27
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Fortnite 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 37
+0%
37
+0%
Metro Exodus 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Palworld 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Valorant 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Palworld 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Valorant 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Palworld 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Metro Exodus 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Palworld 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

This is how R9 280 and Graphics 4 Xe3 Panther Lake iGPU compete in popular games:

  • R9 280 is 13% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 58 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 13.26 11.03
Recency 4 March 2014 5 January 2026

R9 280 has a 20% higher aggregate performance score.

Graphics 4 Xe3 Panther Lake iGPU, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 11 years.

The Radeon R9 280 is our recommended choice as it beats the Graphics 4 Xe3 Panther Lake iGPU in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R9 280 is a desktop graphics card while Graphics 4 Xe3 Panther Lake iGPU 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.


3.6 445 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 4 votes

Rate Graphics 4 Xe3 Panther Lake iGPU 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 Graphics 4 Xe3 Panther Lake iGPU, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.