Radeon R7 M465 vs GeForce GTX 280M SLI
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce GTX 280M SLI and Radeon R7 M465, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
GTX 280M SLI outperforms R7 M465 by a moderate 17% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 739 | 795 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 1.57 | no data |
| Architecture | G9x (2007−2010) | GCN 3.0 (2014−2019) |
| GPU code name | N10E-GTX | Topaz |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 2 March 2009 (16 years ago) | 15 May 2016 (8 years ago) |
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 cores | 256 | 384 |
| Core clock speed | 585 MHz | 1100 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 1125 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 1508 Million | 1,550 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 55 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 150 Watt | no data |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 27.00 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 0.864 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | no data | 8 |
| TMUs | no data | 24 |
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).
| Laptop size | large | medium sized |
| Interface | no data | PCIe 3.0 x8 |
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 | GDDR3 | DDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 950 MHz | 900 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 14.4 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 | No outputs |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 10 | 12 (12_0) |
| Shader Model | no data | 6.3 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | no data | 2.0 |
| Vulkan | - | 1.2.131 |
| CUDA | + | - |
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Atomic Heart | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 10−11
+42.9%
|
7−8
−42.9%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 7−8
+16.7%
|
6−7
−16.7%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Atomic Heart | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 12−14
+33.3%
|
9−10
−33.3%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 10−11
+42.9%
|
7−8
−42.9%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 7−8
+16.7%
|
6−7
−16.7%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 7−8
+40%
|
5−6
−40%
|
| Fortnite | 16−18
+21.4%
|
14−16
−21.4%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 14−16
+15.4%
|
12−14
−15.4%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 7−8
+40%
|
5−6
−40%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 14−16
+7.7%
|
12−14
−7.7%
|
| Valorant | 45−50
+6.7%
|
45−50
−6.7%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Atomic Heart | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 12−14
+33.3%
|
9−10
−33.3%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 10−11
+42.9%
|
7−8
−42.9%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 55−60
+13.5%
|
50−55
−13.5%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 7−8
+16.7%
|
6−7
−16.7%
|
| Dota 2 | 30−33
+11.1%
|
27−30
−11.1%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 7−8
+40%
|
5−6
−40%
|
| Fortnite | 16−18
+21.4%
|
14−16
−21.4%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 14−16
+15.4%
|
12−14
−15.4%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 7−8
+40%
|
5−6
−40%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 9−10
+28.6%
|
7−8
−28.6%
|
| Metro Exodus | 6−7
+20%
|
5−6
−20%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 14−16
+7.7%
|
12−14
−7.7%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 10−11
+11.1%
|
9−10
−11.1%
|
| Valorant | 45−50
+6.7%
|
45−50
−6.7%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 12−14
+33.3%
|
9−10
−33.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 7−8
+16.7%
|
6−7
−16.7%
|
| Dota 2 | 30−33
+11.1%
|
27−30
−11.1%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 7−8
+40%
|
5−6
−40%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 14−16
+15.4%
|
12−14
−15.4%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 14−16
+7.7%
|
12−14
−7.7%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 10−11
+11.1%
|
9−10
−11.1%
|
| Valorant | 45−50
+6.7%
|
45−50
−6.7%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 16−18
+21.4%
|
14−16
−21.4%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 4−5
+33.3%
|
3−4
−33.3%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 24−27
+20%
|
20−22
−20%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 27−30
+12.5%
|
24−27
−12.5%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
+23.1%
|
24−27
−23.1%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 5−6
+25%
|
4−5
−25%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
+25%
|
4−5
−25%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 6−7
+20%
|
5−6
−20%
|
4K
High Preset
| Atomic Heart | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 16−18
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
| Valorant | 16−18
+14.3%
|
14−16
−14.3%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 10−11
+25%
|
8−9
−25%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
+50%
|
2−3
−50%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 4−5
+33.3%
|
3−4
−33.3%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 4−5
+33.3%
|
3−4
−33.3%
|
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Forza Horizon 4, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GTX 280M SLI is 50% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- GTX 280M SLI is ahead in 50 tests (89%)
- there's a draw in 6 tests (11%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 2.96 | 2.54 |
| Recency | 2 March 2009 | 15 May 2016 |
| Chip lithography | 55 nm | 28 nm |
GTX 280M SLI has a 16.5% higher aggregate performance score.
R7 M465, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 7 years, and a 96.4% more advanced lithography process.
The GeForce GTX 280M SLI is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 M465 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.
