Arc A770M vs Radeon R9 280

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 280 with Arc A770M, including specs and performance data.

R9 280
2014
3 GB GDDR5, 200 Watt
14.40

Arc A770M outperforms R9 280 by a whopping 109% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking364186
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation5.26no data
Power efficiency5.0017.42
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code nameTahitiDG2-512
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Designreferenceno data
Release date4 March 2014 (10 years ago)2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$279 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores17924096
Core clock speedno data1650 MHz
Boost clock speed933 MHz2050 MHz
Number of transistors4,313 million21,700 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)200 Watt120 Watt
Texture fill rate104.5524.8
Floating-point processing power3.344 TFLOPS16.79 TFLOPS
ROPs32128
TMUs112256
Tensor Coresno data512
Ray Tracing Coresno data32

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 supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Length275 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1 x 6-pin + 1 x 8-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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount3 GB16 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1250 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth240 GB/s512.0 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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 2x mini-DisplayPortPortable Device Dependent
Eyefinity+-
HDMI+-

Supported technologies

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

CrossFire+-
FreeSync+-
HD3D+-
LiquidVR+-
TressFX+-
TrueAudio+-
UVD+-
DDMA audio+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.16.6
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.23.0
Vulkan+1.3

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.

R9 280 14.40
Arc A770M 30.07
+109%

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.

R9 280 5554
Arc A770M 11603
+109%

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.

R9 280 8020
Arc A770M 25563
+219%

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 HD45−50
−116%
97
+116%
1440p27−30
−111%
57
+111%
4K18−20
−117%
39
+117%

Cost per frame, $

1080p6.20no data
1440p10.33no data
4K15.50no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 113
+0%
113
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Battlefield 5 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 95
+0%
95
+0%
Far Cry 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%
Hitman 3 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Metro Exodus 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Battlefield 5 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 77
+0%
77
+0%
Far Cry 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%
Hitman 3 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Metro Exodus 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 211
+0%
211
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 67
+0%
67
+0%
Far Cry 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%
Hitman 3 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 105
+0%
105
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 179
+0%
179
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 51
+0%
51
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 44
+0%
44
+0%
Far Cry 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 220−230
+0%
220−230
+0%
Hitman 3 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 82
+0%
82
+0%
Metro Exodus 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Hitman 3 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%
Metro Exodus 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 62
+0%
62
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 22
+0%
22
+0%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 74
+0%
74
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

This is how R9 280 and Arc A770M compete in popular games:

  • Arc A770M is 116% faster in 1080p
  • Arc A770M is 111% faster in 1440p
  • Arc A770M is 117% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 72 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 14.40 30.07
Maximum RAM amount 3 GB 16 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 200 Watt 120 Watt

Arc A770M has a 108.8% higher aggregate performance score, a 433.3% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 366.7% more advanced lithography process, and 66.7% lower power consumption.

The Arc A770M is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R9 280 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R9 280 is a desktop card while Arc A770M is a notebook one.


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 R9 280
Radeon R9 280
Intel Arc A770M
Arc A770M

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.


3.6 385 votes

Rate Radeon R9 280 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 89 votes

Rate Arc A770M 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.