GeForce GT 750M SLI vs Radeon R9 280

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 280 with GeForce GT 750M SLI, including specs and performance data.

R9 280
2014, $279
3 GB GDDR5, 200 Watt
13.30
+106%

R9 280 outperforms 750M SLI by a whopping 106% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking426630
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation4.75no data
Power efficiency5.12no data
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2012−2020)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameTahitiN14P-GT
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Designreferenceno data
Release date4 March 2014 (12 years ago)1 April 2013 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$279 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

Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores1792768
Core clock speedno data967 MHz
Boost clock speed933 MHzno data
Number of transistors4,313 million1300 Million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)200 Wattno data
Texture fill rate104.5no data
Floating-point processing power3.344 TFLOPSno data
ROPs32no data
TMUs112no data
L1 Cache448 KBno data
L2 Cache768 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 supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16no data
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 typeGDDR5DDR3, GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount3 GB2x 2 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit2x 128 Bit
Memory clock speed1250 MHz2000 - 5000 MHz
Memory bandwidth240 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+-
FreeSync+-
HD3D+-
LiquidVR+-
TressFX+-
TrueAudio+-
UVD+-
DDMA audio+no data

API and SDK support

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

DirectXDirectX® 1211
Shader Model5.1no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL1.2no data
Vulkan+-
CUDA-+

Synthetic benchmarks

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.

R9 280 13.30
+106%
GT 750M SLI 6.46

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
+117%
GT 750M SLI 3703

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 HD110−120
+93%
57
−93%

Cost per frame, $

1080p2.54no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Fortnite 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Valorant 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 163
+0%
163
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Dota 2 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Far Cry 5 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Fortnite 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Dota 2 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Far Cry 5 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Metro Exodus 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Valorant 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Metro Exodus 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Valorant 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

This is how R9 280 and GT 750M SLI compete in popular games:

  • R9 280 is 93% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 58 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 13.30 6.46
Recency 4 March 2014 1 April 2013

R9 280 has a 106% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 11 months.

The Radeon R9 280 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 750M SLI in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R9 280 is a desktop graphics card while GeForce GT 750M SLI is a notebook one.

Other comparisons

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.


3.6 445 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 16 votes

Rate GeForce GT 750M SLI on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R9 280 or GeForce GT 750M SLI, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.