AMD
Radeon R9 280X vs GeForce 820M
Full comparison of specs, performance and benchmarks
NVIDIA
GeForce 820M
Aggregate performance score
We've compared R9 280X and GeForce 820M across specs and all relevant benchmarks.
↗R9 280X outperforms GeForce 820M by ~20% on the catalog index; this is not a measured FPS gain.+20%
Scores are normalized on the Head to Head scale. Higher is better. How is this calculated?H2HBench Data Quality
Low confidenceSpecifications: Field verification not recordedVerified gaming results: 0Estimated / unverified results: 32Price record updated: Sep 6, 2026
Limited verified data
H2HBench Verdict
Higher catalog score: Radeon R9 280X (~7%)
The score difference is not a measured FPS improvement.
Reasons to consider R9 280X
- Higher catalog performance index
- More graphics memory
- Higher catalog value index
- Recorded feature support: OpenCL 2.1 · Not supported
Reasons to consider GeForce 820M
- Lower stated power consumption
- Recorded feature support: OpenCL 3.0, CUDA 3.0 · Not supported
Catalog metrics radar
Axes with missing data are hidden; every value uses a fixed scale.
AMD
NVIDIAPerformance
Efficiency
Price / performance
Memory capacity
3630
48100
10054
5643
Graphics card ranking
Positions 253–258of 321
Which should you choose?
Two practical conclusions based on community votes and gaming value.
Radeon R9 280X
74 likesHead to Head visitors currently choose this model more often.
Overview
Scores are calculated from specifications, performance, and efficiency.
GamesDirectX, OpenCL, and Vulkan performance
36Better
30
Professional applications3D modeling, video editing, and rendering
32Better
28
AI and machine learningMachine-learning and AI capabilities
30Better
26
Power efficiencyPower consumption across workloads
48
100Better
Head to Head scoreOverall catalog score
45Better
42
Specifications
The better numeric value is highlighted in green, taking the metric direction into account.
Device class
Max monitors
Max resolution
USB Type-C
Recommended PSU
Length
Thickness
Vulkan
OpenGL
DirectX
TFLOPSBetter
Power consumptionBetter
Memory type
Power connector
Release date
Architecture
Compute API
Launch price—
Shader units / coresBetter
Clock speedBetter
Base clockBetter
Boost clockBetter
VRAMBetter
Memory frequencyBetter
Memory busBetter
Memory bandwidthBetter
Interface
Power consumptionBetter
Process node
Die sizeBetter
Memory cache
Transistor countBetter
DisplayPort
HDMI
Upscaling
Gaming FPS
Available results are shown separately; missing data is not treated as zero.
The Gaming FPS section compares R9 280X and GeForce 820M across curated H2H Lab game presets. The useful signal is not only average FPS, but also how each device behaves at 1440p and 4K, how memory capacity and bus width affect heavy textures, and whether the game engine favors raster performance, ray tracing, or driver maturity.
R9 280XGeForce 820M
Verified externalEstimatedSources ↗
Counter-Strike 2
1080p High
175 FPS
153 FPS
1080p Ultra
123 FPS
107 FPS
1440p Ultra
74 FPS
58 FPS
4K Ultra
26 FPS
21 FPS
Counter-Strike 2R9 280X175 FPSGeForce 820M153 FPSR9 280X123 FPSGeForce 820M107 FPSR9 280X74 FPSGeForce 820M58 FPSR9 280X26 FPSGeForce 820M21 FPS
Cyberpunk 2077R9 280X113 FPSGeForce 820M98 FPSR9 280X97 FPSGeForce 820M85 FPSR9 280X54 FPSGeForce 820M42 FPSR9 280X17 FPSGeForce 820M14 FPS
Forza Horizon 5R9 280X142 FPSGeForce 820M124 FPSR9 280X92 FPSGeForce 820M80 FPSR9 280X67 FPSGeForce 820M52 FPSR9 280X38 FPSGeForce 820M30 FPS
Hogwarts LegacyR9 280X92 FPSGeForce 820M80 FPSR9 280X77 FPSGeForce 820M67 FPSR9 280X48 FPSGeForce 820M37 FPSR9 280X17 FPSGeForce 820M14 FPS
H2H workload indices
Comparable internal indices on a fixed 0–100 scale.
H2H Raster IndexH2H Index / 100363018%
H2H Compute IndexH2H Index / 100393220%
H2H Rendering IndexH2H Index / 100423421%
H2H Memory Workload IndexH2H Index / 100564326%
H2H Efficiency IndexH2H Index / 1004810070%
These are versioned H2H calculated indices derived from normalized catalog data. They are not results from a third-party benchmark.
H2H AI workload indices
Estimated workload profiles based on available performance and memory data.
H2H Image Generation IndexH2H Index / 100453622%
H2H ML Training IndexH2H Index / 100443523%
H2H Inference IndexH2H Index / 100423421%
H2H Local LLM IndexH2H Index / 100473724%
H2H Computer Vision IndexH2H Index / 100423421%
These are versioned H2H calculated indices derived from normalized catalog data. They are not results from a third-party benchmark.
Graphics APIs, SDKs and upscaling
DirectX12.011.0
Vulkan1.21.2
OpenGL4.64.6
UpscalingNot supportedNot supported
Compute APIOpenCL 2.1OpenCL 3.0, CUDA 3.0
Architecture and release
ArchitectureGCN 2.0Kepler / Maxwell
Process node28 nm28 nm
Release date20132015
Device classDesktopMobile
GPU cores, die and clocks
Transistor count2080 millionBetter1270 million
Die size160 mm²118 mm²Better
Shader units / cores896Better384
Base clock1000 MHzBetter810 MHz
Boost clock1000 MHzBetter810 MHz
Board size, power and compatibility
InterfacePCIe 3x16PCIe 3.0 x16
LengthVaries by boardOEM dependent
ThicknessVaries by boardMXM Module
Recommended PSUVaries by boardOEM dependent
Power connector6+8 pinIntegrated laptop power
Display outputs and limits
HDMIBoard dependentOEM dependent
DisplayPortBoard dependentOEM dependent
USB Type-CNoOEM dependent
Max monitorsVaries by boardOEM dependent
Max resolutionVaries by boardDepends on host system
Memory and compute throughput
VRAM3 GB GDDR5Better2 GB DDR3
Memory typeGDDR5GDDR5 / DDR3
Memory bus384 bitBetter128 bit
TFLOPS1.792Better0.622
Other comparisons
Reviews and questions
Explain this comparison
Beyond percentages: causes, relevant specifications, and practical impact behind every chart.
What AI will explain
Overall score, radar, FPS, synthetic tests, specifications, efficiency, and value.
Evidence details
Data coverage
- Verified gaming results
- 0
- Verified synthetic results
- 0
- Games with verified results
- 0
- Verified community results
- 0
- Estimated / unverified results
- 32
- Specifications
- 0 / 69
Calculated scores · How is this calculated?
Scores use the catalog model and may include estimated inputs. Open each score to see its origin and the methodology.
clamp(round(performance × 0.7 + (efficiency ?? 50) × 0.2 + (value is missing ? 0 : (value − 50) × 0.2)), 0, 100)Price evidence · View sources (4)
Verified community results
No verified community benchmarks yet.
Reviewed by
No individual editorial review is recorded for this comparison.
Comparison history
Show recorded changes (3)
- · Record updated: products
- · Record updated: products
- · Record updated: products
Why you can trust this comparison
Origin and confidence are evaluated from the evidence attached to each value. Unverified results are identified, and specification, benchmark and price dates remain separate.
Owner experiences
Real builds, results, and community feedback.
Moderator reviewedHelpful to the communityExpert badges
Frequently asked comparison questions
Short recommendations based on performance, memory, power consumption, and intended use.
01Which is better for gaming: R9 280X or GeForce 820M?+
R9 280X has the higher overall gaming score, while R9 280X offers the better price-to-performance ratio. The final choice depends on resolution and settings.
02Which is better for streaming?+
GeForce 820M is the stronger streaming choice thanks to performance, hardware encoding, and application support. Check AV1, H.264, and HEVC support before buying.
03Which is better for Blender?+
GeForce 820M is generally the better option for Blender and GPU rendering. Rendering-engine support and available VRAM also matter.
04Which is better for video editing?+
R9 280X offers more overall performance, while R9 280X offers more memory headroom. Codecs, hardware encoders, and editor optimization can change the result.
05Which is better for neural networks and AI?+
GeForce 820M is the more practical option for local AI workloads. VRAM capacity, compute libraries, and framework compatibility are especially important.
06Which is better for 1080p?+
R9 280X is the most rational 1080p choice, where high frame rates and cost per frame matter most.
07Which is better for 1440p?+
R9 280X leads in combined 1440p performance. R9 280X can be preferable for heavy textures and games with high VRAM usage.
08Which is better for 4K?+
R9 280X is preferable for 4K, where total performance, memory bandwidth, and VRAM capacity have the greatest impact.
09Which is better for a quiet PC?+
GeForce 820M is easier to use in a quiet build because of its lower estimated power and thermal load. Actual noise depends on the specific cooler.
10Which is better without replacing the power supply?+
GeForce 820M is the safer candidate because its stated power consumption is lower. Verify PSU wattage, age, and power connectors.
11Is it worth upgrading from the previous generation?+
Consider upgrading to R9 280X if your current device no longer delivers the required FPS, memory capacity, or feature support. A gain below 15–20% is usually worth waiting for a price cut.