A10G vs Radeon R9 M280X
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon R9 M280X with A10G, including specs and performance data.
A10G outperforms R9 M280X by a whopping 1486% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 923 | 196 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 15.66 |
| Architecture | GCN 2.0 (2013−2017) | Ampere (2020−2025) |
| GPU code name | Saturn | GA102 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Workstation |
| Release date | 5 February 2015 (10 years ago) | 12 April 2021 (4 years ago) |
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 cores | 896 | 9216 |
| Core clock speed | 1000 MHz | 1320 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 1710 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 2,080 million | 28,300 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 8 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | no data | 150 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 61.60 | 492.5 |
| Floating-point processing power | 1.971 TFLOPS | 31.52 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 16 | 96 |
| TMUs | 56 | 288 |
| Tensor Cores | no data | 288 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 72 |
| L1 Cache | 224 KB | 9 MB |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 6 MB |
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 size | large | no data |
| Bus support | Not Listed | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 267 mm |
| Width | no data | 1-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | 8-pin EPS |
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 type | Not Listed | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 0 MB | 12 GB |
| Memory bus width | Not Listed | 384 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | no data | 1563 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 96 GB/s | 600.2 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
| Resizable BAR | - | + |
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 Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| FreeSync | + | - |
| HD3D | + | - |
| PowerTune | + | - |
| DualGraphics | + | - |
| ZeroCore | + | - |
| Switchable graphics | + | - |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | DirectX® 11 | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 6.3 | 6.6 |
| OpenGL | 4.4 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | Not Listed | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | - | 1.2 |
| Mantle | + | - |
| CUDA | - | 8.6 |
| DLSS | - | + |
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.
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.
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 HD | 27
−1381%
| 400−450
+1381%
|
| 4K | 18
−1456%
| 280−290
+1456%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4
−1400%
|
45−50
+1400%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−1400%
|
60−65
+1400%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 7−8
−1471%
|
110−120
+1471%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 5−6
−1400%
|
75−80
+1400%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4
−1400%
|
45−50
+1400%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−1400%
|
60−65
+1400%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 12
−1483%
|
190−200
+1483%
|
| Fortnite | 8−9
−1400%
|
120−130
+1400%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−12
−1445%
|
170−180
+1445%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 4−5
−1400%
|
60−65
+1400%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 7−8
−1471%
|
110−120
+1471%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
−1445%
|
170−180
+1445%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
−1438%
|
600−650
+1438%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 5−6
−1400%
|
75−80
+1400%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4
−1400%
|
45−50
+1400%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 67
−1467%
|
1050−1100
+1467%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−1400%
|
60−65
+1400%
|
| Dota 2 | 36
−1428%
|
550−600
+1428%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 5−6
−1400%
|
75−80
+1400%
|
| Fortnite | 8−9
−1400%
|
120−130
+1400%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−12
−1445%
|
170−180
+1445%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 4−5
−1400%
|
60−65
+1400%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 4−5
−1400%
|
60−65
+1400%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 7−8
−1471%
|
110−120
+1471%
|
| Metro Exodus | 3−4
−1400%
|
45−50
+1400%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
−1445%
|
170−180
+1445%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 16
−1463%
|
250−260
+1463%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
−1438%
|
600−650
+1438%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 5−6
−1400%
|
75−80
+1400%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−1400%
|
60−65
+1400%
|
| Dota 2 | 31
−1352%
|
450−500
+1352%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 5−6
−1400%
|
75−80
+1400%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−12
−1445%
|
170−180
+1445%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 7−8
−1471%
|
110−120
+1471%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
−1445%
|
170−180
+1445%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 9
−1456%
|
140−150
+1456%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
−1438%
|
600−650
+1438%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 8−9
−1400%
|
120−130
+1400%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 5−6
−1400%
|
75−80
+1400%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 14−16
−1471%
|
220−230
+1471%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 18−20
−1456%
|
280−290
+1456%
|
| Valorant | 14−16
−1471%
|
220−230
+1471%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−1300%
|
14−16
+1300%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 3−4
−1400%
|
45−50
+1400%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
−1400%
|
75−80
+1400%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 2−3
−1400%
|
30−33
+1400%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 3−4
−1400%
|
45−50
+1400%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 3−4
−1400%
|
45−50
+1400%
|
4K
High Preset
| Grand Theft Auto V | 16−18
−1463%
|
250−260
+1463%
|
| Valorant | 10−11
−1400%
|
150−160
+1400%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 4−5
−1400%
|
60−65
+1400%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 3−4
−1400%
|
45−50
+1400%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 3−4
−1400%
|
45−50
+1400%
|
This is how R9 M280X and A10G compete in popular games:
- A10G is 1381% faster in 1080p
- A10G is 1456% faster in 4K
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.84 | 29.19 |
| Recency | 5 February 2015 | 12 April 2021 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 8 nm |
A10G has a 1486.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, and a 250% more advanced lithography process.
The A10G is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R9 M280X in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon R9 M280X is a notebook graphics card while A10G is a workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
