GeForce GTX 280M SLI vs Radeon HD 6850

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
6850 6850 1440SP Edition 6850 X2 6870 6870 1600SP Edition 6870 X2
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
260M 260M SLI 280M 280M SLI 285M 285M SLI

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon HD 6850 with GeForce GTX 280M SLI, including specs and performance data.

HD 6850
2010, $179
1 GB GDDR5, 127 Watt
4.61
+45.4%

HD 6850 outperforms 280M SLI by a considerable 45% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Share:
HD 6850 HD 6850
GTX 280M SLI GTX 280M SLI

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking692792
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.89no data
Power efficiency2.801.63
ArchitectureTeraScale 2 (2009−2015)G9x (2007−2010)
GPU code nameBartsN10E-GTX
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Designreferenceno data
Release date21 October 2010 (15 years ago)2 March 2009 (16 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$179 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

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 cores960256
Core clock speedno data585 MHz
Number of transistors1,700 million1508 Million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)127 Watt150 Watt
Texture fill rate37.20no data
Floating-point processing power1.488 TFLOPSno data
ROPs32no data
TMUs48no data
L1 Cache192 KBno data
L2 Cache512 KBno data

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 sizeno datalarge
Bus supportAGPno data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16no data
Length198 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pinno data

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 typeGDDR5GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount1 GB2 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speedno data950 MHz
Memory bandwidth128.0 GB/sno data
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 2x mini-DisplayPortno data
Eyefinity+-
HDMI+-

Supported technologies

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

CrossFire+-

API and SDK support

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

DirectXDirectX® 1110
Shader Model5.0no data
OpenGL4.4no data
OpenCL1.2no data
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

Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Fortnite 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Dota 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Fortnite 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Metro Exodus 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Valorant 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Dota 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Valorant 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Metro Exodus 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Valorant 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

4K
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Dota 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 57 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 4.61 3.17
Recency 21 October 2010 2 March 2009
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 2 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 55 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 127 Watt 150 Watt

HD 6850 has a 45.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, a 37.5% more advanced lithography process, and 18.1% lower power consumption.

GTX 280M SLI, on the other hand, has a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

The Radeon HD 6850 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 280M SLI in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon HD 6850 is a desktop graphics card while GeForce GTX 280M SLI is a notebook one.

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.

AMD Radeon HD 6850
Radeon HD 6850
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 280M SLI
GeForce GTX 280M SLI
Like
Like

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

HD 6850 Radeon HD 6850
vs
GTX 460 SE GeForce GTX 460 SE
GTX 280M SLI GeForce GTX 280M SLI
vs
HD 8790M Radeon HD 8790M
HD 6850 Radeon HD 6850
vs
ATI HD 5850 Radeon HD 5850
HD 6950 Radeon HD 6950
vs
Instinct Vega Radeon Instinct Vega
HD 6950 Radeon HD 6950
vs
RX 5700 Radeon RX 5700
HD 6950 Radeon HD 6950
vs
RTX 4080 SUPER GeForce RTX 4080 SUPER
HD 6850 Radeon HD 6850
vs
GeForce 930MX GeForce 930MX
HD 6850 Radeon HD 6850
vs
K2000M Quadro K2000M
HD 6850 Radeon HD 6850
vs
R9 260 OEM Radeon R9 260 OEM
HD 6850 Radeon HD 6850
vs
315 OEM GeForce 315 OEM
HD 6850 Radeon HD 6850
vs
R5 M230 Rebrand Radeon R5 M230 Rebrand
HD 6850 Radeon HD 6850
vs
Quadro P400 Quadro P400
HD 6850 Radeon HD 6850
vs
Quadro K600 Quadro K600

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.

3.9 622 votes

Rate Radeon HD 6850 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.9 63 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 280M SLI on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon HD 6850 or GeForce GTX 280M SLI, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.