ATI Mobility Radeon HD 3870 X2 vs R9 M280X
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon R9 M280X and Mobility Radeon HD 3870 X2, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
Mobility HD 3870 X2 outperforms R9 M280X by a small 8% 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 | 946 | 925 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 1.47 |
| Architecture | GCN 2.0 (2013−2017) | TeraScale (2005−2013) |
| GPU code name | Saturn | M88 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 5 February 2015 (11 years ago) | 1 September 2008 (17 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 | 320 ×2 |
| Core clock speed | 1000 MHz | 660 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 2,080 million | 666 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 55 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | no data | 110 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 61.60 | 10.56 ×2 |
| Floating-point processing power | 1.971 TFLOPS | 0.4224 TFLOPS ×2 |
| ROPs | 16 | 16 ×2 |
| TMUs | 56 | 16 ×2 |
| L1 Cache | 224 KB | no data |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 256 KB |
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 | large |
| Bus support | Not Listed | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
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 | GDDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 0 MB | 512 MB ×2 |
| Memory bus width | Not Listed | 256 Bit ×2 |
| Memory clock speed | no data | 850 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 96 GB/s | 54.4 GB/s ×2 |
| 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 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 support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | DirectX® 11 | 10.1 (10_1) |
| Shader Model | 6.3 | 4.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.4 | 3.3 |
| OpenCL | Not Listed | N/A |
| Vulkan | - | N/A |
| Mantle | + | - |
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.
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.
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
+0%
| 27−30
+0%
|
| 4K | 18
+0%
| 18−20
+0%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4
−33.3%
|
4−5
+33.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 5−6
−20%
|
6−7
+20%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4
−33.3%
|
4−5
+33.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 12
+140%
|
5−6
−140%
|
| Fortnite | 9−10
−11.1%
|
10−11
+11.1%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−12
+0%
|
10−12
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
+0%
|
10−12
+0%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
−2.6%
|
40−45
+2.6%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 5−6
−20%
|
6−7
+20%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4
−33.3%
|
4−5
+33.3%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 67
+55.8%
|
40−45
−55.8%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 36
+56.5%
|
21−24
−56.5%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 9−10
−11.1%
|
10−11
+11.1%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−12
+0%
|
10−12
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 3−4
−33.3%
|
4−5
+33.3%
|
| Metro Exodus | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
+0%
|
10−12
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 16
+100%
|
8−9
−100%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
−2.6%
|
40−45
+2.6%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 5−6
−20%
|
6−7
+20%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 31
+34.8%
|
21−24
−34.8%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−12
+0%
|
10−12
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
+0%
|
10−12
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 9
+12.5%
|
8−9
−12.5%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
−2.6%
|
40−45
+2.6%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 9−10
−11.1%
|
10−11
+11.1%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 14−16
−7.1%
|
14−16
+7.1%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 18−20
−10.5%
|
21−24
+10.5%
|
| Valorant | 12−14
−23.1%
|
16−18
+23.1%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 3−4
−33.3%
|
4−5
+33.3%
|
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Valorant | 9−10
−11.1%
|
10−11
+11.1%
|
4K
Ultra
| Dota 2 | 4−5
−25%
|
5−6
+25%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 1−2 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 0−1 | 1−2 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
4K
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
This is how R9 M280X and ATI Mobility HD 3870 X2 compete in popular games:
- A tie in 1080p
- A tie in 4K
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Far Cry 5, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the R9 M280X is 140% faster.
- in Counter-Strike 2, with 1080p resolution and the Low Preset, the ATI Mobility HD 3870 X2 is 33% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- R9 M280X performs better in 6 tests (12%)
- ATI Mobility HD 3870 X2 performs better in 19 tests (39%)
- there's a draw in 24 tests (49%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.94 | 2.10 |
| Recency | 5 February 2015 | 1 September 2008 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 55 nm |
R9 M280X has an age advantage of 6 years, and a 96% more advanced lithography process.
ATI Mobility HD 3870 X2, on the other hand, has a 8% higher aggregate performance score.
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Radeon R9 M280X and Mobility Radeon HD 3870 X2.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
