Radeon R9 280X vs GeForce GTX 770

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 770 and Radeon R9 280X, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTX 770
2013
2 GB GDDR5, 230 Watt
15.39
+1.4%

GTX 770 outperforms R9 280X by a minimal 1% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking346351
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation4.315.59
Power efficiency4.624.19
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)
GPU code nameGK104Tahiti
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Designno datareference
Release date30 May 2013 (11 years ago)8 October 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$399 $299

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

R9 280X has 30% better value for money than GTX 770.

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 cores15362048
Core clock speed1046 MHzno data
Boost clock speed1085 MHz1000 MHz
Number of transistors3,540 million4,313 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)230 Watt250 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature98 °Cno data
Texture fill rate138.9128.0
Floating-point processing power3.333 TFLOPS4.096 TFLOPS
ROPs3232
TMUs128128

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 supportPCI Express 3.0PCIe 3.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length267 mm275 mm
Height4.376" (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slot2-slot
Minimum recommended system power600 Wattno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin1 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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount2 GB3 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit384 Bit
Memory clock speed1753 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth224.3 GB/s288 GB/s
Shared memoryno data-

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 ConnectorsOne Dual Link DVI-I, One Dual Link DVI-D, One HDMI, One DisplayPort2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
Multi monitor support4 displaysno data
Eyefinity-+
HDMI++
HDCP+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
DisplayPort support-+
Audio input for HDMIInternalno data

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

AppAcceleration-+
CrossFire-+
FreeSync-+
HD3D-+
LiquidVR-+
TressFX-+
TrueAudio-+
UVD-+
DDMA audiono data+
Blu Ray 3D+-
3D Gaming+-
3D Vision+-
PhysX+-
3D Vision Live+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)DirectX® 12
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.34.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.1.126+
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 770 15.39
+1.4%
R9 280X 15.18

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 770 5919
+1.4%
R9 280X 5837

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 770 8150
R9 280X 8343
+2.4%

Unigine Heaven 4.0

This is an old DirectX 11 benchmark, a newer version of Unigine 3.0 with relatively small differences. It displays a fantasy medieval town sprawling over several flying islands. The benchmark is still sometimes used, despite its significant age, as it was released back in 2013.

GTX 770 1078
+6%
R9 280X 1017

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 HD60−65
−6.7%
64
+6.7%
4K30−35
−10%
33
+10%

Cost per frame, $

1080p6.65
−42.3%
4.67
+42.3%
4K13.30
−46.8%
9.06
+46.8%
  • R9 280X has 42% lower cost per frame in 1080p
  • R9 280X has 47% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Elden Ring 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Metro Exodus 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Valorant 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Dota 2 36
+0%
36
+0%
Elden Ring 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Far Cry 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Fortnite 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 54
+0%
54
+0%
Metro Exodus 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 52
+0%
52
+0%
Valorant 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
World of Tanks 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Dota 2 137
+0%
137
+0%
Far Cry 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Valorant 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Elden Ring 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
World of Tanks 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Metro Exodus 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Valorant 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Dota 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Elden Ring 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Metro Exodus 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Dota 2 68
+0%
68
+0%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Fortnite 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Valorant 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

This is how GTX 770 and R9 280X compete in popular games:

  • R9 280X is 7% faster in 1080p
  • R9 280X is 10% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 63 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 15.39 15.18
Recency 30 May 2013 8 October 2013
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 3 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 230 Watt 250 Watt

GTX 770 has a 1.4% higher aggregate performance score, and 8.7% lower power consumption.

R9 280X, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 4 months, and a 50% higher maximum VRAM amount.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between GeForce GTX 770 and Radeon R9 280X.


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 770
GeForce GTX 770
AMD Radeon R9 280X
Radeon R9 280X

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 1649 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 770 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 701 vote

Rate Radeon R9 280X 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.