GeForce 610M vs Radeon R9 280X

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 280X with GeForce 610M, including specs and performance data.

R9 280X
2013
3 GB GDDR5, 250 Watt
14.06
+1909%

R9 280X outperforms 610M by a whopping 1909% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking3671176
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation5.20no data
Power efficiency4.124.27
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2012−2020)Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)
GPU code nameTahitiGF119
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Designreferenceno data
Release date8 October 2013 (11 years ago)1 December 2011 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$299 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 cores204848
Core clock speedno data738 MHz
Boost clock speed1000 MHz900 MHz
Number of transistors4,313 million292 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Watt12 Watt
Texture fill rate128.05.904
Floating-point processing power4.096 TFLOPS0.1417 TFLOPS
Video decodersno dataH.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p
ROPs324
TMUs1288

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 3.0PCI Express 2.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 2.0 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 typeGDDR5DDR3
Maximum RAM amount3 GB1 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit64bit
Memory clock speedno data900 MHz
Memory bandwidth288 GB/sUp to 14.4 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, 1x DisplayPortNo outputs
Eyefinity+-
HDMI++
Maximum VGA resolutionno dataUp to 2048x1536
DisplayPort support+-

Supported technologies

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

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

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212 API
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.64.5
OpenCL1.21.1
Vulkan+N/A
CUDA-+

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 280X 14.06
+1909%
GeForce 610M 0.70

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 280X 5837
+1899%
GeForce 610M 292

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

R9 280X 10792
+2027%
GeForce 610M 508

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

R9 280X 33045
+1395%
GeForce 610M 2210

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 HD65
+2067%
3−4
−2067%
4K31
+3000%
1−2
−3000%

Cost per frame, $

1080p4.60no data
4K9.65no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 80−85
+2567%
3−4
−2567%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−33
+1400%
2−3
−1400%
Hogwarts Legacy 24−27
+550%
4−5
−550%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 60−65
+1933%
3−4
−1933%
Counter-Strike 2 80−85
+2567%
3−4
−2567%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−33
+1400%
2−3
−1400%
Far Cry 5 45−50
+2250%
2−3
−2250%
Fortnite 158
+2157%
7−8
−2157%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+1100%
5−6
−1100%
Forza Horizon 5 45−50
+2150%
2−3
−2150%
Hogwarts Legacy 24−27
+550%
4−5
−550%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 50−55
+550%
8−9
−550%
Valorant 110−120
+307%
27−30
−307%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 60−65
+1933%
3−4
−1933%
Counter-Strike 2 80−85
+2567%
3−4
−2567%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 190−200
+860%
20−22
−860%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−33
+1400%
2−3
−1400%
Dota 2 90−95
+600%
12−14
−600%
Far Cry 5 45−50
+2250%
2−3
−2250%
Fortnite 60
+2900%
2−3
−2900%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+1100%
5−6
−1100%
Forza Horizon 5 45−50
+2150%
2−3
−2150%
Grand Theft Auto V 54
+2600%
2−3
−2600%
Hogwarts Legacy 24−27
+550%
4−5
−550%
Metro Exodus 27−30
+2800%
1−2
−2800%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 50−55
+550%
8−9
−550%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 48
+700%
6−7
−700%
Valorant 110−120
+307%
27−30
−307%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 60−65
+1933%
3−4
−1933%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−33
+1400%
2−3
−1400%
Dota 2 137
+954%
12−14
−954%
Far Cry 5 45−50
+2250%
2−3
−2250%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+1100%
5−6
−1100%
Hogwarts Legacy 24−27
+550%
4−5
−550%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 29
+263%
8−9
−263%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 20
+233%
6−7
−233%
Valorant 110−120
+307%
27−30
−307%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 48
+2300%
2−3
−2300%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 27−30
+2700%
1−2
−2700%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 100−110
+3433%
3−4
−3433%
Grand Theft Auto V 21−24
+2200%
1−2
−2200%
Metro Exodus 16−18 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140
+1829%
7−8
−1829%
Valorant 140−150
+2000%
7−8
−2000%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+3800%
1−2
−3800%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14 0−1
Far Cry 5 30−33
+650%
4−5
−650%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+1650%
2−3
−1650%
Hogwarts Legacy 14−16
+1400%
1−2
−1400%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+950%
2−3
−950%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 30−35
+3000%
1−2
−3000%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 10−11 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 24−27
+73.3%
14−16
−73.3%
Hogwarts Legacy 8−9 0−1
Metro Exodus 10−11 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20 0−1
Valorant 75−80
+1850%
4−5
−1850%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 20−22 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 10−11 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6 0−1
Dota 2 68
+2167%
3−4
−2167%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+400%
3−4
−400%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+2400%
1−2
−2400%
Hogwarts Legacy 8−9 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+550%
2−3
−550%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 14−16
+600%
2−3
−600%

This is how R9 280X and GeForce 610M compete in popular games:

  • R9 280X is 2067% faster in 1080p
  • R9 280X is 3000% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the R9 280X is 3433% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, R9 280X surpassed GeForce 610M in all 35 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 14.06 0.70
Recency 8 October 2013 1 December 2011
Maximum RAM amount 3 GB 1 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 250 Watt 12 Watt

R9 280X has a 1908.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, a 200% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

GeForce 610M, on the other hand, has 1983.3% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R9 280X is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 610M in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R9 280X is a desktop card while GeForce 610M 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 280X
Radeon R9 280X
NVIDIA GeForce 610M
GeForce 610M

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.


4.1 721 vote

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 774 votes

Rate GeForce 610M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R9 280X or GeForce 610M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.