GeForce GTX 280M vs Radeon R5 (Bristol Ridge)

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R5 (Bristol Ridge) and GeForce GTX 280M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

R5 (Bristol Ridge)
2016
12 Watt
2.44
+63.8%

R5 (Bristol Ridge) outperforms GTX 280M by an impressive 64% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking839980
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency3.721.36
ArchitectureGCN 1.2/2.0 (2015−2016)Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code nameBristol RidgeG92
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date1 June 2016 (8 years ago)3 March 2009 (15 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 cores384128
Core clock speedno data585 MHz
Boost clock speed800 MHzno data
Number of transistors3100 Million754 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)12-45 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rateno data37.44
Floating-point processing powerno data0.3745 TFLOPS
Gigaflopsno data562
ROPsno data16
TMUsno data64

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 sizemedium sizedlarge
Bus supportno dataPCI-E 2.0
Interfaceno dataMXM-IV
SLI options-+
MXM Typeno dataMXM 3.0 Type-B

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 typeno dataGDDR3
Maximum RAM amountno data1 GB
Memory bus width64/128 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speedno dataUp to 950 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data61 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 Connectorsno dataHDMIDual Link DVISingle Link DVIDisplayPortLVDSVGA
HDMI-+
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536
Audio input for HDMIno dataS/PDIF

Supported technologies

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

Power managementno data8.0

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (FL 12_0)11.1 (10_0)
Shader Modelno data4.0
OpenGLno data2.1
OpenCLno data1.1
Vulkan-N/A
CUDA-+

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 HD12
+71.4%
7−8
−71.4%

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 8−9
+33.3%
6−7
−33.3%
Battlefield 5 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Far Cry 5 4
+100%
2−3
−100%
Far Cry New Dawn 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
+175%
4−5
−175%
Hitman 3 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 20−22
+33.3%
14−16
−33.3%
Metro Exodus 1−2 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 7
+133%
3−4
−133%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−12
+37.5%
8−9
−37.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+12.1%
30−35
−12.1%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 8−9
+33.3%
6−7
−33.3%
Battlefield 5 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Far Cry 5 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Far Cry New Dawn 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
+175%
4−5
−175%
Hitman 3 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 20−22
+33.3%
14−16
−33.3%
Metro Exodus 1−2 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+100%
3−4
−100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−12
+37.5%
8−9
−37.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 13
+18.2%
10−12
−18.2%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+12.1%
30−35
−12.1%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 8−9
+33.3%
6−7
−33.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Far Cry 5 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
+175%
4−5
−175%
Hitman 3 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 20−22
+33.3%
14−16
−33.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−12
+37.5%
8−9
−37.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+18.2%
10−12
−18.2%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+12.1%
30−35
−12.1%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+100%
3−4
−100%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Hitman 3 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Watch Dogs: Legion 14−16
+100%
7−8
−100%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 0−1 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 1−2 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

This is how R5 (Bristol Ridge) and GTX 280M compete in popular games:

  • R5 (Bristol Ridge) is 71% faster 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 R5 (Bristol Ridge) is 175% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • R5 (Bristol Ridge) is ahead in 44 tests (90%)
  • there's a draw in 5 tests (10%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.44 1.49
Recency 1 June 2016 3 March 2009
Chip lithography 28 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 12 Watt 75 Watt

R5 (Bristol Ridge) has a 63.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 132.1% more advanced lithography process, and 525% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R5 (Bristol Ridge) is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 280M 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.


AMD Radeon R5 (Bristol Ridge)
Radeon R5 (Bristol Ridge)
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 280M
GeForce GTX 280M

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


3.4 25 votes

Rate Radeon R5 (Bristol Ridge) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 8 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 280M 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.