GeForce GTX 480 vs Radeon R9 280X

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

R9 280X
2013
3 GB GDDR5, 250 Watt
15.11
+42.1%

Radeon R9 280X outperforms GeForce GTX 480 by a considerable 42% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking330398
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation11.931.27
ArchitectureGCN (2011−2017)Fermi (2010−2014)
GPU code nameThaiti XTLGF100
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Designreferenceno data
Release date8 October 2013 (10 years ago)7 December 2010 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$299 $499
Current price$11.99 (0x MSRP)$15.99 (0x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

R9 280X has 839% better value for money than GTX 480.

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores2048480
CUDA coresno data480
Core clock speedno data700 MHz
Boost clock speed1000 MHzno data
Number of transistors4,313 million3,100 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Watt295 Watt
Maximum GPU temperatureno data105 °C
Texture fill rate128.042 billion/sec
Floating-point performance4,096 gflops1,345.0 gflops

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 3.016x PCI-E 2.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length275 mm10.5" (267 mm) (26.7 cm)
Heightno data4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors1 x 6-pin + 1 x 8-pin6-pin & 8-pin
SLI optionsno 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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount3 GB1536 MB
Memory bus width384 Bit384 Bit
Memory clock speedno data1848 MHz (3696 data rate)
Memory bandwidth288 GB/s177.4 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 DisplayPortTwo Dual Link DVI, Mini HDMI
Multi monitor supportno data+
Eyefinity+no data
HDMI++
HDCPno data+
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536
DisplayPort support+no data
Audio input for HDMIno dataInternal

Supported technologies

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

AppAcceleration+no data
CrossFire1no data
Enduro-no data
FreeSync1no data
HD3D+no data
LiquidVR1no data
PowerTune-no data
TressFX1no data
TrueAudio+no data
ZeroCore-no data
UVD+no data
DDMA audio+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212 (11_0)
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.64.2
OpenCL1.21.1
Vulkan+N/A
Mantle-no data
CUDAno data+

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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 280X 15.11
+42.1%
GTX 480 10.63

Radeon R9 280X outperforms GeForce GTX 480 by 42% based on our aggregate benchmark results.


Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

R9 280X 5837
+42.2%
GTX 480 4106

Radeon R9 280X outperforms GeForce GTX 480 by 42% in Passmark.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

R9 280X 10792
+115%
GTX 480 5014

Radeon R9 280X outperforms GeForce GTX 480 by 115% in 3DMark 11 Performance GPU.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

R9 280X 8343
+129%
GTX 480 3650

Radeon R9 280X outperforms GeForce GTX 480 by 129% in 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics.

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
+44.4%
45−50
−44.4%
4K34
+61.9%
21−24
−61.9%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+50%
16−18
−50%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30−35
+40.9%
21−24
−40.9%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 24−27
+56.3%
16−18
−56.3%
Battlefield 5 45−50
+48.5%
30−35
−48.5%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−35
+43.5%
21−24
−43.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+50%
16−18
−50%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+32.3%
30−35
−32.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 40−45
+44.8%
27−30
−44.8%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+37.8%
35−40
−37.8%
Hitman 3 35−40
+45.8%
24−27
−45.8%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50
+40%
35−40
−40%
Metro Exodus 45−50
+48.4%
30−35
−48.4%
Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
+40%
30−33
−40%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 40−45
+40%
30−33
−40%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
+47.4%
18−20
−47.4%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30−35
+40.9%
21−24
−40.9%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 24−27
+56.3%
16−18
−56.3%
Battlefield 5 45−50
+48.5%
30−35
−48.5%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−35
+43.5%
21−24
−43.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+50%
16−18
−50%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+32.3%
30−35
−32.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 40−45
+44.8%
27−30
−44.8%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+37.8%
35−40
−37.8%
Hitman 3 35−40
+45.8%
24−27
−45.8%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50
+40%
35−40
−40%
Metro Exodus 45−50
+48.4%
30−35
−48.4%
Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
+40%
30−33
−40%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 40−45
+40%
30−33
−40%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 48
+118%
21−24
−118%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
+47.4%
18−20
−47.4%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30−35
+40.9%
21−24
−40.9%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 24−27
+56.3%
16−18
−56.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−35
+43.5%
21−24
−43.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+50%
16−18
−50%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+32.3%
30−35
−32.3%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+37.8%
35−40
−37.8%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50
+40%
35−40
−40%
Metro Exodus 45−50
+48.4%
30−35
−48.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 20
−10%
21−24
+10%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
+47.4%
18−20
−47.4%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
+40%
30−33
−40%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 27−30
+38.1%
21−24
−38.1%
Far Cry New Dawn 27−30
+55.6%
18−20
−55.6%
Hitman 3 21−24
+57.1%
14−16
−57.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2 10−12
+57.1%
7−8
−57.1%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 16−18
+60%
10−11
−60%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14
+71.4%
7−8
−71.4%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18−20
+46.2%
12−14
−46.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+60%
5−6
−60%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+47.1%
16−18
−47.1%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+45%
20−22
−45%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
+40.9%
21−24
−40.9%
Metro Exodus 27−30
+68.8%
16−18
−68.8%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27−30
+80%
14−16
−80%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+60%
10−11
−60%
Watch Dogs: Legion 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry 5 30−35
+28%
24−27
−28%
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16
+50%
10−11
−50%
Hitman 3 10−12
+57.1%
7−8
−57.1%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
+45.5%
10−12
−45.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+75%
8−9
−75%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%
Battlefield 5 16−18
+77.8%
9−10
−77.8%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
+66.7%
6−7
−66.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Forza Horizon 4 20−22
+53.8%
12−14
−53.8%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
+45.5%
10−12
−45.5%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+27.3%
10−12
−27.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+40%
10−11
−40%

This is how R9 280X and GTX 480 compete in popular games:

  • R9 280X is 44% faster in 1080p
  • R9 280X is 62% faster in 4K

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

  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the R9 280X is 118% faster.
  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GTX 480 is 10% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • R9 280X is ahead in 71 test (99%)
  • GTX 480 is ahead in 1 test (1%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 15.11 10.63
Recency 8 October 2013 7 December 2010
Cost $299 $499
Maximum RAM amount 3 GB 1536 MB
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 250 Watt 295 Watt

The Radeon R9 280X is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 480 in performance tests.


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 280X
Radeon R9 280X
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 480
GeForce GTX 480

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.


4.1 636 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 195 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 480 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.