Radeon R9 280X vs Apple M1 8-Core GPU
Aggregated performance score
Radeon R9 280X outperforms Apple M1 8-Core GPU by a small 7% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in performance ranking | 344 | 326 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 11.93 |
| Architecture | no data | GCN (2011−2017) |
| GPU code name | no data | Thaiti XTL |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Design | no data | reference |
| Release date | 10 November 2020 (3 years ago) | 8 October 2013 (10 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $299 |
| Current price | no data | $11.99 (0x MSRP) |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
Detailed specifications
General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 8 | 2048 |
| Core clock speed | 1278 MHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 1000 MHz |
| Number of transistors | no data | 4,313 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 5 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | no data | 250 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 128.0 |
| Floating-point performance | no data | 4,096 gflops |
Form factor & compatibility
Information on Apple M1 8-Core GPU and Radeon R9 280X compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.
| Bus support | no data | PCIe 3.0 |
| Interface | no data | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 275 mm |
| Width | no data | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | 1 x 6-pin + 1 x 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 type | no data | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | no data | 3 GB |
| Memory bus width | no data | 384 Bit |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 288 GB/s |
| Shared memory | + | - |
Connectivity and outputs
Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.
| Display Connectors | no data | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort |
| Eyefinity | no data | + |
| HDMI | no data | + |
| DisplayPort support | no data | + |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| AppAcceleration | no data | + |
| CrossFire | no data | 1 |
| Enduro | no data | - |
| FreeSync | no data | 1 |
| HD3D | no data | + |
| LiquidVR | no data | 1 |
| PowerTune | no data | - |
| TressFX | no data | 1 |
| TrueAudio | no data | + |
| ZeroCore | no data | - |
| UVD | no data | + |
| DDMA audio | no data | + |
API compatibility
List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | no data | DirectX® 12 |
| Shader Model | no data | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | no data | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | no data | + |
| Mantle | no data | - |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark performance score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.
Radeon R9 280X outperforms Apple M1 8-Core GPU by 7% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
3DMark Ice Storm GPU
Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.
Benchmark coverage: 8%
Radeon R9 280X outperforms Apple M1 8-Core GPU by 2% in 3DMark Ice Storm GPU.
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 HD | 28
−132%
| 65
+132%
|
| 4K | 27−30
−14.8%
| 31
+14.8%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 21−24
−4.5%
|
21−24
+4.5%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 27−30
−6.9%
|
30−35
+6.9%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 21−24
−8.7%
|
24−27
+8.7%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 45−50
−6.3%
|
50−55
+6.3%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 35−40
−8.3%
|
35−40
+8.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 21−24
−4.5%
|
21−24
+4.5%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 35−40
−5.4%
|
35−40
+5.4%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 35−40
−7.9%
|
40−45
+7.9%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 45−50
−8.2%
|
50−55
+8.2%
|
| Hitman 3 | 35−40
−7.9%
|
40−45
+7.9%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 27−30
−10.3%
|
30−35
+10.3%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 24−27
−4.2%
|
24−27
+4.2%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 27
−18.5%
|
30−35
+18.5%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 24−27
−7.7%
|
27−30
+7.7%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 27−30
−6.9%
|
30−35
+6.9%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 21−24
−8.7%
|
24−27
+8.7%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 45−50
−6.3%
|
50−55
+6.3%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 35−40
−8.3%
|
35−40
+8.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 21−24
−4.5%
|
21−24
+4.5%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 35−40
−5.4%
|
35−40
+5.4%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 35−40
−7.9%
|
40−45
+7.9%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 45−50
−8.2%
|
50−55
+8.2%
|
| Hitman 3 | 35−40
−7.9%
|
40−45
+7.9%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 27−30
−10.3%
|
30−35
+10.3%
|
| Metro Exodus | 21−24
−4.5%
|
21−24
+4.5%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 24−27
−4.2%
|
24−27
+4.2%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 32
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 27−30
−65.5%
|
48
+65.5%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 24−27
−7.7%
|
27−30
+7.7%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 27−30
−6.9%
|
30−35
+6.9%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 21−24
−8.7%
|
24−27
+8.7%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 45−50
−6.3%
|
50−55
+6.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 21−24
−4.5%
|
21−24
+4.5%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 35−40
−5.4%
|
35−40
+5.4%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 35−40
−7.9%
|
40−45
+7.9%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 45−50
−8.2%
|
50−55
+8.2%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 27−30
+45%
|
20
−45%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 24−27
−7.7%
|
27−30
+7.7%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 20−22
−10%
|
21−24
+10%
|
| Hitman 3 | 21−24
−9.1%
|
24−27
+9.1%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 20−22
−5%
|
21−24
+5%
|
| Metro Exodus | 12−14
−16.7%
|
14−16
+16.7%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 10−11
−10%
|
10−12
+10%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 18−20
−5.6%
|
18−20
+5.6%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 14−16
−7.1%
|
14−16
+7.1%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 10−12
−9.1%
|
12−14
+9.1%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 27−30
−10.3%
|
30−35
+10.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 7−8
−14.3%
|
8−9
+14.3%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 21−24
−8.7%
|
24−27
+8.7%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 24−27
−7.7%
|
27−30
+7.7%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 27−30
−7.4%
|
27−30
+7.4%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 14−16
−7.1%
|
14−16
+7.1%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 8−9
−12.5%
|
9−10
+12.5%
|
4K
High Preset
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
| Hitman 3 | 12−14
−7.7%
|
14−16
+7.7%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 7−8
−14.3%
|
8−9
+14.3%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 8−9
−12.5%
|
9−10
+12.5%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 12−14
−7.7%
|
14−16
+7.7%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 8−9
−12.5%
|
9−10
+12.5%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 14−16
−14.3%
|
16−18
+14.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 10−12
−9.1%
|
12−14
+9.1%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 14−16
−7.1%
|
14−16
+7.1%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 18−20
−10.5%
|
21−24
+10.5%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 5−6
−20%
|
6−7
+20%
|
This is how Apple M1 8-Core GPU and R9 280X compete in popular games:
- R9 280X is 132% faster in 1080p
- R9 280X is 15% faster in 4K
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Apple M1 8-Core GPU is 45% faster than the R9 280X.
- in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the R9 280X is 66% faster than the Apple M1 8-Core GPU.
All in all, in popular games:
- Apple M1 8-Core GPU is ahead in 1 test (1%)
- R9 280X is ahead in 61 test (90%)
- there's a draw in 6 tests (9%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 14.05 | 15.08 |
| Recency | 10 November 2020 | 8 October 2013 |
| Chip lithography | 5 nm | 28 nm |
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Apple M1 8-Core GPU and Radeon R9 280X.
Be aware that Apple M1 8-Core GPU is a notebook card while Radeon R9 280X is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Comparisons with similar GPUs
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
