Radeon R9 280 vs GeForce GTX 1080

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 1080 and Radeon R9 280, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTX 1080
2016
8 GB GDDR5X, 180 Watt
40.46
+180%

GTX 1080 outperforms R9 280 by a whopping 180% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking103362
Place by popularity63not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation19.605.44
Power efficiency15.514.99
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)
GPU code nameGP104Tahiti
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Designno datareference
Release date27 May 2016 (8 years ago)4 March 2014 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$599 $279

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTX 1080 has 260% better value for money than R9 280.

Detailed specifications

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

Pipelines / CUDA cores25601792
Core clock speed1607 MHzno data
Boost clock speed1733 MHz933 MHz
Number of transistors7,200 million4,313 million
Manufacturing process technology16 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)180 Watt200 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature94 °Cno data
Texture fill rate277.3104.5
Floating-point processing power8.873 TFLOPS3.344 TFLOPS
ROPs6432
TMUs160112

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 3.0PCIe 3.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length267 mm275 mm
Height4.376" (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slot2-slot
Recommended system power (PSU)500 Wattno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 8-pin1 x 6-pin + 1 x 8-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 typeGDDR5XGDDR5
Maximum RAM amount8 GB3 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit384 Bit
Memory clock speed10 GB/s1250 MHz
Memory bandwidth320 GB/s240 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 ConnectorsDP 1.42, HDMI 2.0b, DL-DVI2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 2x mini-DisplayPort
Multi monitor support+no data
Eyefinity-+
HDMI++
G-SYNC support+-

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 audiono data+
GPU Boost3.0no data
VR Ready+no data
Ansel+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)DirectX® 12
Shader Model6.45.1
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.2.131+
CUDA+-

Synthetic benchmark performance

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. 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.

GTX 1080 40.46
+180%
R9 280 14.46

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 1080 15559
+180%
R9 280 5559

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.

GTX 1080 21409
+167%
R9 280 8020

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 HD126
+180%
45−50
−180%
1440p75
+213%
24−27
−213%
4K60
+186%
21−24
−186%

Cost per frame, $

1080p4.75
+30.4%
6.20
−30.4%
1440p7.99
+45.6%
11.63
−45.6%
4K9.98
+33.1%
13.29
−33.1%
  • GTX 1080 has 30% lower cost per frame in 1080p
  • GTX 1080 has 46% lower cost per frame in 1440p
  • GTX 1080 has 33% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 85−90
+183%
30−33
−183%
Cyberpunk 2077 85−90
+190%
30−33
−190%
Elden Ring 140−150
+186%
50−55
−186%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 84
+180%
30−33
−180%
Counter-Strike 2 85−90
+183%
30−33
−183%
Cyberpunk 2077 85−90
+190%
30−33
−190%
Forza Horizon 4 190−200
+183%
70−75
−183%
Metro Exodus 111
+217%
35−40
−217%
Red Dead Redemption 2 114
+185%
40−45
−185%
Valorant 160−170
+195%
55−60
−195%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 130
+189%
45−50
−189%
Counter-Strike 2 85−90
+183%
30−33
−183%
Cyberpunk 2077 85−90
+190%
30−33
−190%
Dota 2 113
+183%
40−45
−183%
Elden Ring 140−150
+186%
50−55
−186%
Far Cry 5 75
+213%
24−27
−213%
Fortnite 158
+187%
55−60
−187%
Forza Horizon 4 190−200
+183%
70−75
−183%
Grand Theft Auto V 119
+198%
40−45
−198%
Metro Exodus 83
+207%
27−30
−207%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 242
+185%
85−90
−185%
Red Dead Redemption 2 53
+194%
18−20
−194%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 142
+184%
50−55
−184%
Valorant 160−170
+195%
55−60
−195%
World of Tanks 272
+186%
95−100
−186%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 73
+204%
24−27
−204%
Counter-Strike 2 47
+194%
16−18
−194%
Cyberpunk 2077 85−90
+190%
30−33
−190%
Dota 2 100
+186%
35−40
−186%
Far Cry 5 179
+198%
60−65
−198%
Forza Horizon 4 190−200
+183%
70−75
−183%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 88
+193%
30−33
−193%
Valorant 160−170
+195%
55−60
−195%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 72
+200%
24−27
−200%
Elden Ring 80−85
+207%
27−30
−207%
Grand Theft Auto V 72
+200%
24−27
−200%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+192%
60−65
−192%
Red Dead Redemption 2 35
+192%
12−14
−192%
World of Tanks 250−260
+184%
90−95
−184%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 72
+200%
24−27
−200%
Counter-Strike 2 28
+180%
10−11
−180%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
+200%
14−16
−200%
Far Cry 5 118
+195%
40−45
−195%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+195%
40−45
−195%
Metro Exodus 82
+204%
27−30
−204%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 70−75
+196%
24−27
−196%
Valorant 120−130
+187%
45−50
−187%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 40−45
+200%
14−16
−200%
Dota 2 74
+208%
24−27
−208%
Elden Ring 40−45
+186%
14−16
−186%
Grand Theft Auto V 74
+208%
24−27
−208%
Metro Exodus 28
+180%
10−11
−180%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 106
+203%
35−40
−203%
Red Dead Redemption 2 21
+200%
7−8
−200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 74
+208%
24−27
−208%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 42
+200%
14−16
−200%
Counter-Strike 2 40−45
+200%
14−16
−200%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+200%
6−7
−200%
Dota 2 129
+187%
45−50
−187%
Far Cry 5 59
+181%
21−24
−181%
Fortnite 54
+200%
18−20
−200%
Forza Horizon 4 65−70
+219%
21−24
−219%
Valorant 65−70
+183%
24−27
−183%

This is how GTX 1080 and R9 280 compete in popular games:

  • GTX 1080 is 180% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 1080 is 213% faster in 1440p
  • GTX 1080 is 186% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 40.46 14.46
Recency 27 May 2016 4 March 2014
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 3 GB
Chip lithography 16 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 180 Watt 200 Watt

GTX 1080 has a 179.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 166.7% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 75% more advanced lithography process, and 11.1% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 1080 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R9 280 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080
GeForce GTX 1080
AMD Radeon R9 280
Radeon R9 280

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.


4.3 5519 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 1080 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 410 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.