GeForce GTX 280 vs FirePro 3D V8750
GeForce GTX 280
Popular choices:
FirePro 3D V8750
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The GeForce GTX 280 is positioned at rank 314 and the FirePro 3D V8750 is on rank 370, so the GeForce GTX 280 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GeForce GTX 280
Performance Per Dollar FirePro 3D V8750
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The FirePro 3D V8750 is significantly newer (2014 vs 2008). The FirePro 3D V8750 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The GeForce GTX 280 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce GTX 280 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1% higher G3D Mark score. However, the FirePro 3D V8750 offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 280 | FirePro 3D V8750 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+1%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | Normal Efficiency |
| Case Fit | Standard Size (267mm) | Standard Size (254mm) |
💎 Value Proposition
The FirePro 3D V8750 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the FirePro 3D V8750 holds the technical lead. Priced at $500 (vs $649), it costs 23% less, resulting in a 28.5% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 280 | FirePro 3D V8750 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+28.5%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($649) | ✅More affordable ($500) |
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 280 and FirePro 3D V8750
GeForce GTX 280
The GeForce GTX 280 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in June 16 2008. It features the Tesla 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 602 MHz. It has 240 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 236W. Manufactured using 65 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,285 points. Launch price was $649.
FirePro 3D V8750
The FirePro 3D V8750 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in January 18 2014. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 850 MHz. It has 2048 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 274W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,272 points.
Graphics Performance
The GeForce GTX 280 scores 1,285 and the FirePro 3D V8750 reaches 1,272 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 280 is built on Tesla 2.0 while the FirePro 3D V8750 uses GCN 1.0, both on 65 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 240 (GeForce GTX 280) vs 2,048 (FirePro 3D V8750). Raw compute: 0.6221 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 280) vs 3.482 TFLOPS (FirePro 3D V8750).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 280 | FirePro 3D V8750 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 1,285+1% | 1,272 |
| Architecture | Tesla 2.0 | GCN 1.0 |
| Process Node | 65 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 240 | 2048+753% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.6221 TFLOPS | 3.482 TFLOPS+460% |
| ROPs | 32 | 32 |
| TMUs | 80 | 128+60% |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 768 KB+200% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce GTX 280 | FirePro 3D V8750 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 2.1 (Compatible) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | FSR 3 (Compatible) | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GeForce GTX 280 comes with 1 GB of VRAM, while the FirePro 3D V8750 has 2 GB. The FirePro 3D V8750 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 256 KB (GeForce GTX 280) vs 768 KB (FirePro 3D V8750) — the FirePro 3D V8750 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 280 | FirePro 3D V8750 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 1 GB | 2 GB+100% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 128-bit+100% | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 768 KB+200% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 11.1 (10_0) (GeForce GTX 280) vs 10.1 (FirePro 3D V8750). Vulkan: N/A vs None. OpenGL: 3.3 vs 3.2. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 2.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 280 | FirePro 3D V8750 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 11.1 (10_0)+10% | 10.1 |
| Vulkan | N/A | None |
| OpenGL | 3.3+3% | 3.2 |
| Max Displays | 2 | 2 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: None (GeForce GTX 280) vs UVD 2 (FirePro 3D V8750). Decoder: PureVideo HD (VP2) vs UVD 2. Supported codecs: H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 (GeForce GTX 280) vs MPEG-2,H.264,VC-1 (FirePro 3D V8750).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 280 | FirePro 3D V8750 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | None | UVD 2 |
| Decoder | PureVideo HD (VP2) | UVD 2 |
| Codecs | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 | MPEG-2,H.264,VC-1 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 280 draws 236W versus the FirePro 3D V8750's 274W — a 14.9% difference. The GeForce GTX 280 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 550W (GeForce GTX 280) vs 350W (FirePro 3D V8750). Power connectors: 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 267mm vs 254mm, occupying 2 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 85 vs 90°C.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 280 | FirePro 3D V8750 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 236W-14% | 274W |
| Recommended PSU | 550W | 350W-36% |
| Power Connector | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 267mm | 254mm |
| Height | 111mm | 111mm |
| Slots | 2 | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 85-6% | 90°C |
| Perf/Watt | 5.4+17% | 4.6 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce GTX 280 launched at $649 MSRP and currently averages $649, while the FirePro 3D V8750 launched at $1799 and now averages $500. The FirePro 3D V8750 costs 23% less ($149 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 2.0 (GeForce GTX 280) vs 2.5 (FirePro 3D V8750) — the FirePro 3D V8750 offers 25% better value. The FirePro 3D V8750 is the newer GPU (2014 vs 2008).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 280 | FirePro 3D V8750 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $649-64% | $1799 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $649 | $500-23% |
| Performance per Dollar | 2.0 | 2.5+25% |
| Codename | GT200 | Tahiti |
| Release | June 16 2008 | January 18 2014 |
| Ranking | #802 | #423 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GeForce GTX 280 and FirePro 3D V8750
