GeForce GTX 280M vs Radeon R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop)

Place in the ranking	765	976
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	no data	1.37
Architecture	GCN (2012−2015)	Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code name	Kaveri Spectre	G92
Market segment	Desktop	Laptop
Release date	14 January 2014 (10 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 cores	512	128
Core clock speed	720 MHz	585 MHz
Number of transistors	no data	754 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	no data	75 Watt
Texture fill rate	no data	37.44
Floating-point processing power	no data	0.3745 TFLOPS
Gigaflops	no data	562
ROPs	no data	16
TMUs	no data	64

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	no data	large
Bus support	no data	PCI-E 2.0
Interface	no data	MXM-IV
SLI options	-	+
MXM Type	no data	MXM 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 type	no data	GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount	no data	1 GB
Memory bus width	no data	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	no data	Up to 950 MHz
Memory bandwidth	no data	61 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	HDMIDual Link DVISingle Link DVIDisplayPortLVDSVGA
HDMI	-	+
Maximum VGA resolution	no data	2048x1536
Audio input for HDMI	no data	S/PDIF

Supported 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 compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (FL 12_0)	11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model	no data	4.0
OpenGL	no data	2.1
OpenCL	no data	1.1
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 HD

18
+125%

8−9

−125%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

6−7
+50%

4−5

−50%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	9−10 +50%	6−7 −50%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2	0−1
Battlefield 5	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	7−8 +75%	4−5 −75%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 +50%	4−5 −50%
Far Cry 5	6−7 +200%	2−3 −200%
Far Cry New Dawn	8−9 +100%	4−5 −100%
Forza Horizon 4	16−18 +300%	4−5 −300%
Hitman 3	8−9 +33.3%	6−7 −33.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn	21−24 +53.3%	14−16 −53.3%
Metro Exodus	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Red Dead Redemption 2	7−8 +133%	3−4 −133%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	12−14 +62.5%	8−9 −62.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 +18.2%	30−35 −18.2%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	9−10 +50%	6−7 −50%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2	0−1
Battlefield 5	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	7−8 +75%	4−5 −75%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 +50%	4−5 −50%
Far Cry 5	6−7 +200%	2−3 −200%
Far Cry New Dawn	8−9 +100%	4−5 −100%
Forza Horizon 4	16−18 +300%	4−5 −300%
Hitman 3	8−9 +33.3%	6−7 −33.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn	21−24 +53.3%	14−16 −53.3%
Metro Exodus	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Red Dead Redemption 2	7−8 +133%	3−4 −133%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	12−14 +62.5%	8−9 −62.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	27 +145%	10−12 −145%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 +18.2%	30−35 −18.2%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	9−10 +50%	6−7 −50%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	7−8 +75%	4−5 −75%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 +50%	4−5 −50%
Far Cry 5	6−7 +200%	2−3 −200%
Forza Horizon 4	16−18 +300%	4−5 −300%
Hitman 3	8−9 +33.3%	6−7 −33.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn	21−24 +53.3%	14−16 −53.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	12−14 +62.5%	8−9 −62.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	6 −83.3%	10−12 +83.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 +18.2%	30−35 −18.2%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

7−8
+133%

3−4

−133%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%
Far Cry New Dawn	5−6 +150%	2−3 −150%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Far Cry 5	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
Hitman 3	8−9 +14.3%	7−8 −14.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn	8−9 +60%	5−6 −60%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Watch Dogs: Legion	18−20 +157%	7−8 −157%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

6−7
+50%

4−5

−50%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%

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
Forza Horizon 4	1−2	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	1−2	0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

4−5
+33.3%

3−4

−33.3%

This is how R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) and GTX 280M compete in popular games:

R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) is 125% 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 R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) is 300% faster.
in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GTX 280M is 83% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) is ahead in 47 tests (96%)
GTX 280M is ahead in 1 test (2%)
there's a draw in 1 test (2%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	3.04	1.49
Recency	14 January 2014	3 March 2009
Chip lithography	28 nm	65 nm

R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) has a 104% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, and a 132.1% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 280M in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) is a desktop card while GeForce GTX 280M is a notebook one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.