Iris Graphics 540 vs Radeon R9 280

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 280 with Iris Graphics 540, including specs and performance data.

R9 280
2014
3 GB GDDR5, 200 Watt
14.11
+341%

R9 280 outperforms Iris Graphics 540 by a whopping 341% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking371754
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation5.31no data
Power efficiency4.9514.98
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)Generation 9.0 (2015−2016)
GPU code nameTahitiSkylake GT3e
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Designreferenceno data
Release date4 March 2014 (10 years ago)1 September 2015 (9 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$279 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

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 cores1792384
Core clock speedno data300 MHz
Boost clock speed933 MHz1000 MHz
Number of transistors4,313 million189 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm14 nm+
Power consumption (TDP)200 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate104.548.00
Floating-point processing power3.344 TFLOPS0.768 TFLOPS
ROPs326
TMUs11248

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).

Bus supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16Ring Bus
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 typeGDDR5System Shared
Maximum RAM amount3 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width384 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1250 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth240 GB/sno data
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
Quick Syncno data+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212 (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.4
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.

R9 280 14.11
+341%
Iris Graphics 540 3.20

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 5552
+341%
Iris Graphics 540 1260

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
+454%
Iris Graphics 540 1448

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 HD100−110
+317%
24
−317%

Cost per frame, $

1080p2.79no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Battlefield 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Fortnite 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Battlefield 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Dota 2 29
+0%
29
+0%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Fortnite 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Metro Exodus 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Valorant 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Dota 2 27
+0%
27
+0%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Valorant 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Metro Exodus 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Valorant 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

This is how R9 280 and Iris Graphics 540 compete in popular games:

  • R9 280 is 317% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 61 test (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 14.11 3.20
Recency 4 March 2014 1 September 2015
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 200 Watt 15 Watt

R9 280 has a 340.9% higher aggregate performance score.

Iris Graphics 540, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 1233.3% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R9 280 is our recommended choice as it beats the Iris Graphics 540 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R9 280 is a desktop card while Iris Graphics 540 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 R9 280
Radeon R9 280
Intel Iris Graphics 540
Iris Graphics 540

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.


3.6 418 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 99 votes

Rate Iris Graphics 540 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R9 280 or Iris Graphics 540, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.