
GRID M60-8A
Popular choices:

Radeon R9 280
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. The GRID M60-8A is positioned at rank #280 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Lower cost-benefit for your build. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GRID M60-8A
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Radeon R9 280 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.2% higher G3D Mark score. However, the GRID M60-8A offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | GRID M60-8A | Radeon R9 280 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.2%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.2%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+33.3%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | Normal Efficiency | Normal Efficiency |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The Radeon R9 280 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Radeon R9 280 holds the technical lead. Priced at $40 (vs $120), it costs 67% less, resulting in a 200.5% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GRID M60-8A | Radeon R9 280 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+200.5%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($120) | ✅More affordable ($40) |
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 GRID M60-8A and Radeon R9 280

GRID M60-8A
The GRID M60-8A is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in August 30 2015. It features the Maxwell 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 557 MHz to 1178 MHz. It has 2048 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 225W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 5,523 points.

Radeon R9 280
The Radeon R9 280 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in March 4 2014. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The boost clock speed is 933 MHz. It has 1792 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 200W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 5,532 points. Launch price was $279.
Graphics Performance
The GRID M60-8A scores 5,523 and the Radeon R9 280 reaches 5,532 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.2% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GRID M60-8A is built on Maxwell 2.0 while the Radeon R9 280 uses GCN 1.0, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 2,048 (GRID M60-8A) vs 1,792 (Radeon R9 280). Raw compute: 4.825 TFLOPS (GRID M60-8A) vs 3.344 TFLOPS (Radeon R9 280). Boost clocks: 1178 MHz vs 933 MHz.
| Feature | GRID M60-8A | Radeon R9 280 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 5,523 | 5,532 |
| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | GCN 1.0 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 2048+14% | 1792 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 4.825 TFLOPS+44% | 3.344 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 1178 MHz+26% | 933 MHz |
| ROPs | 64+100% | 32 |
| TMUs | 128+14% | 112 |
| L1 Cache | 768 KB+71% | 448 KB |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+167% | 0.75 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GRID M60-8A | Radeon R9 280 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | AMD Anti-Lag |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GRID M60-8A comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon R9 280 has 3 GB. The GRID M60-8A offers 33.3% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 384-bit. L2 Cache: 2 MB (GRID M60-8A) vs 0.75 MB (Radeon R9 280) — the GRID M60-8A has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GRID M60-8A | Radeon R9 280 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB+33% | 3 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 384-bit+200% |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+167% | 0.75 MB |
Power & Dimensions
The GRID M60-8A draws 225W versus the Radeon R9 280's 200W — a 11.8% difference. The Radeon R9 280 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GRID M60-8A) vs 500W (Radeon R9 280). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs 6-pin + 8-pin.
| Feature | GRID M60-8A | Radeon R9 280 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 225W | 200W-11% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W-30% | 500W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | 6-pin + 8-pin |
| Length | 1mm | — |
| Slots | 0 | — |
| Perf/Watt | 24.5 | 27.7+13% |
Value Analysis
The GRID M60-8A launched at $2500 MSRP and currently averages $120, while the Radeon R9 280 launched at $279 and now averages $40. The Radeon R9 280 costs 66.7% less ($80 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 46.0 (GRID M60-8A) vs 138.3 (Radeon R9 280) — the Radeon R9 280 offers 200.7% better value. The GRID M60-8A is the newer GPU (2015 vs 2014).
| Feature | GRID M60-8A | Radeon R9 280 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $2500 | $279-89% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $120 | $40-67% |
| Performance per Dollar | 46.0 | 138.3+201% |
| Codename | GM204 | Tahiti |
| Release | August 30 2015 | March 4 2014 |
| Ranking | #505 | #415 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.

















