Radeon R9 280 vs Quadro M3000M

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.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.•
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Per Dollar Quadro M3000M

#1

Tesla K20m

MSRP: $3199|Avg: $55

186%

#9

Quadro M3000M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A

100%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

The Quadro M3000M is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.8% higher G3D Mark score and 33.3% more VRAM (4 GB vs 3 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Radeon R9 280.

Insight	Radeon R9 280	Quadro M3000M
Performance	❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.8%)	✅Leading raw performance (+0.8%)
Longevity	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / GCN 1.0 (2012−2020))	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019))
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	❌ Less VRAM capacity	✅ More VRAM (+33.3%)
Efficiency	⚡ Higher Power Consumption	💡 Excellent Perf/Watt
Case Fit	—	—

💎 Value Proposition

While current pricing data is unavailable, the Quadro M3000M remains the clear technical winner. Check real-time availability to determine if the performance gap justifies the market price.

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.

Radeon R9 280 Benchmark Check

Quadro M3000M Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Radeon R9 280 and Quadro M3000M

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.

Quadro M3000M

The Quadro M3000M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in August 18 2015. It features the Maxwell 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 1050 MHz. It has 1,024 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 5,574 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The Radeon R9 280 scores 5,532 and the Quadro M3000M reaches 5,574 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.8% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon R9 280 is built on GCN 1.0 while the Quadro M3000M uses Maxwell 2.0, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 1,792 (Radeon R9 280) vs 1 (Quadro M3000M). Raw compute: 3.344 TFLOPS (Radeon R9 280) vs 2.15 TFLOPS (Quadro M3000M).

Feature	Radeon R9 280	Quadro M3000M
G3D Mark Score	5,532	5,574
Architecture	GCN 1.0	Maxwell 2.0
Process Node	28 nm	28 nm
Shading Units	1792+75%	1,024
Compute (TFLOPS)	3.344 TFLOPS+56%	2.15 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	32
TMUs	112+75%	64
L1 Cache	448 KB+17%	384 KB
L2 Cache	0.75 MB	2 MB+167%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	Radeon R9 280	Quadro M3000M
Upscaling Tech	FSR 1.0 (Software)	FSR 1.0 (Software)
Frame Generation	Not Supported	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	AMD Anti-Lag	Standard

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The Radeon R9 280 comes with 3 GB of VRAM, while the Quadro M3000M has 4 GB. The Quadro M3000M offers 33.3% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 384-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 0.75 MB (Radeon R9 280) vs 2 MB (Quadro M3000M) — the Quadro M3000M has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	Radeon R9 280	Quadro M3000M
VRAM Capacity	3 GB	4 GB+33%
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR6
Bus Width	384-bit+200%	128-bit
L2 Cache	0.75 MB	2 MB+167%

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The Radeon R9 280 draws 200W versus the Quadro M3000M's 75W — a 90.9% difference. The Quadro M3000M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 500W (Radeon R9 280) vs 350W (Quadro M3000M). Power connectors: 6-pin + 8-pin vs PCIe-powered.