GeForce GTX 280M vs Radeon 530

Place in performance ranking	776	932
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Value for money	0.61	0.16
Architecture	GCN (2011−2017)	G9x (2007−2010)
GPU code name	Meso	N10E-GTX
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	21 March 2017 (7 years ago)	2 March 2009 (15 years ago)
Current price	$627	$140

Value for money

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

Radeon 530 has 281% better value for money than GTX 280M.

Technical specs

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	384	128
CUDA cores	no data	128
Core clock speed	1024 MHz	585 MHz
Boost clock speed	1024 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	1,550 million	754 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	50 Watt	75 Watt
Texture fill rate	24.50	38 billion/sec
Floating-point performance	784.1 gflops	374.5 gflops
Gigaflops	no data	562

Size and compatibility

Information on Radeon 530 and GeForce GTX 280M compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. 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.

Laptop size	no data	large
Bus support	no data	PCI-E 2.0
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x8	MXM-IV
Supplementary power connectors	None	no data
SLI options	no data	+
MXM Type	no data	MXM 3.0 Type-B

Memory

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	DDR3/GDDR5	GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	1 GB
Memory bus width	64 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	2250 MHz	Up to 950 MHz
Memory bandwidth	28.8 GB/s	61 GB/s
Shared memory	-	-

Video outputs and ports

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	1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA	HDMIDual Link DVISingle Link DVIDisplayPortLVDSVGA
HDMI	+	+
Maximum VGA resolution	no data	2048x1536
Audio input for HDMI	no data	S/PDIF

Technologies

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

Power management

no data

8.0

API support

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

DirectX	12.0	11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model	5.0	4.0
OpenGL	4.5	2.1
OpenCL	2.0	1.1
Vulkan	+	N/A
CUDA	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 530 2.62
+77%

GTX 280M 1.48

Radeon 530 outperforms GeForce GTX 280M by 77% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

Radeon 530 1014
+76.3%

GTX 280M 575

Radeon 530 outperforms GeForce GTX 280M by 76% in Passmark.

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

Radeon 530 6338

GTX 280M 6672
+5.3%

GeForce GTX 280M outperforms Radeon 530 by 5% in 3DMark Vantage Performance.

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

16
+77.8%

9−10

−77.8%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

5−6
+25%

4−5

−25%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	16	0−1
Battlefield 5	14	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	12 +20%	10−11 −20%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +25%	4−5 −25%
Far Cry 5	10 +100%	5−6 −100%
Far Cry New Dawn	9 +80%	5−6 −80%
Forza Horizon 4	20 +1900%	1−2 −1900%
Hitman 3	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%
Horizon Zero Dawn	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Red Dead Redemption 2	6−7 +50%	4−5 −50%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	9 +28.6%	7−8 −28.6%
Watch Dogs: Legion	1−2	0−1

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	15	0−1
Battlefield 5	13	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4 −150%	10−11 +150%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +25%	4−5 −25%
Far Cry 5	10 +100%	5−6 −100%
Far Cry New Dawn	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Forza Horizon 4	6−7 +500%	1−2 −500%
Hitman 3	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%
Horizon Zero Dawn	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Metro Exodus	4 +100%	2−3 −100%
Red Dead Redemption 2	6−7 +50%	4−5 −50%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	4 −75%	7−8 +75%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	11 +175%	4−5 −175%
Watch Dogs: Legion	1−2	0−1

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4	0−1
Battlefield 5	5−6	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +25%	4−5 −25%
Far Cry 5	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Far Cry New Dawn	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Forza Horizon 4	6−7 +500%	1−2 −500%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	6 +50%	4−5 −50%
Watch Dogs: Legion	1−2	0−1

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	5−6 +66.7%	3−4 −66.7%
Hitman 3	5−6 +25%	4−5 −25%
Horizon Zero Dawn	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Metro Exodus	1−2	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	1−2	0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	6−7 +20%	5−6 −20%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Far Cry 5	4−5 +100%	2−3 −100%
Forza Horizon 4	1−2	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Hitman 3	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
Horizon Zero Dawn	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	1−2	0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2	0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2	0−1
Far Cry 5	4−5 +33.3%	3−4 −33.3%
Far Cry New Dawn	6−7 +20%	5−6 −20%

This is how Radeon 530 and GTX 280M compete in popular games:

Radeon 530 is 77.8% faster than GTX 280M in 1080p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Radeon 530 is 1900% faster than the GTX 280M.
in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the GTX 280M is 150% faster than the Radeon 530.

All in all, in popular games:

Radeon 530 is ahead in 26 tests (81%)
GTX 280M is ahead in 2 tests (6%)
there's a draw in 4 tests (13%)

Advantages and disadvantages

Performance score	2.62	1.48
Recency	21 March 2017	2 March 2009
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	1 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	50 Watt	75 Watt