Radeon R9 280X vs GeForce GTX 960
Radeon R9 280X
Popular choices:
GeForce GTX 960
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.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce GTX 960 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.5% 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 280X.
| Insight | Radeon R9 280X | GeForce GTX 960 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.5%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.5%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / 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 | — | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce GTX 960 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the GeForce GTX 960 holds the technical lead. Priced at $45 (vs $60), it costs 25% less, resulting in a 34.1% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Radeon R9 280X | GeForce GTX 960 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+34.1%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($60) | ✅More affordable ($45) |
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 Radeon R9 280X and GeForce GTX 960
Radeon R9 280X
The Radeon R9 280X is manufactured by AMD. It was released in October 8 2013. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The boost clock speed is 1000 MHz. It has 2048 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 200W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6,100 points. Launch price was $299.
GeForce GTX 960
The GeForce GTX 960 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in January 22 2015. It features the Maxwell 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1127 MHz to 1178 MHz. It has 1024 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 100W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6,133 points. Launch price was $199.
Graphics Performance
The Radeon R9 280X scores 6,100 and the GeForce GTX 960 reaches 6,133 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.5% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon R9 280X is built on GCN 1.0 while the GeForce GTX 960 uses Maxwell 2.0, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 2,048 (Radeon R9 280X) vs 1,024 (GeForce GTX 960). Raw compute: 4.096 TFLOPS (Radeon R9 280X) vs 2.413 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 960). Boost clocks: 1000 MHz vs 1178 MHz.
| Feature | Radeon R9 280X | GeForce GTX 960 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 6,100 | 6,133 |
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Maxwell 2.0 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 2048+100% | 1024 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 4.096 TFLOPS+70% | 2.413 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 1000 MHz | 1178 MHz+18% |
| ROPs | 32 | 32 |
| TMUs | 128+100% | 64 |
| L1 Cache | 512 KB+33% | 384 KB |
| L2 Cache | 0.75 MB | 1 MB+33% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Radeon R9 280X | GeForce GTX 960 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 2.1 (Compatible) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | FSR 3 (Compatible) |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | AMD Anti-Lag | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The Radeon R9 280X comes with 3 GB of VRAM, while the GeForce GTX 960 has 4 GB. The GeForce GTX 960 offers 33.3% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Memory bandwidth: 288 GB/s (Radeon R9 280X) vs 112 GB/s (GeForce GTX 960) — a 157.1% advantage for the Radeon R9 280X. Bus width: 384-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 0.75 MB (Radeon R9 280X) vs 1 MB (GeForce GTX 960) — the GeForce GTX 960 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Radeon R9 280X | GeForce GTX 960 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 3 GB | 4 GB+33% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 288 GB/s+157% | 112 GB/s |
| Bus Width | 384-bit+200% | 128-bit |
| L2 Cache | 0.75 MB | 1 MB+33% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (11_1) (Radeon R9 280X) vs 12 (12_1) (GeForce GTX 960). Vulkan: 1.2 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 4.
| Feature | Radeon R9 280X | GeForce GTX 960 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 (11_1) | 12 (12_1) |
| Vulkan | 1.2 | 1.3+8% |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 3 | 4+33% |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: VCE 2.0 (Radeon R9 280X) vs NVENC (5th Gen) (GeForce GTX 960). Decoder: UVD 4.2 vs NVDEC (2nd Gen). Supported codecs: H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 (Radeon R9 280X) vs HEVC,H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1,VP8 (GeForce GTX 960).
| Feature | Radeon R9 280X | GeForce GTX 960 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | VCE 2.0 | NVENC (5th Gen) |
| Decoder | UVD 4.2 | NVDEC (2nd Gen) |
| Codecs | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 | HEVC,H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1,VP8 |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon R9 280X draws 200W versus the GeForce GTX 960's 100W — a 66.7% difference. The GeForce GTX 960 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 500W (Radeon R9 280X) vs 400W (GeForce GTX 960). Power connectors: 6-pin + 8-pin vs 6-pin. Typical load temperature: 75°C vs 75 C.
| Feature | Radeon R9 280X | GeForce GTX 960 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 200W | 100W-50% |
| Recommended PSU | 500W | 400W-20% |
| Power Connector | 6-pin + 8-pin | 6-pin |
| Length | — | 241mm |
| Height | — | 111mm |
| Slots | 2 | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 75°C | 75 C |
| Perf/Watt | 30.5 | 61.3+101% |
Value Analysis
The Radeon R9 280X launched at $299 MSRP and currently averages $60, while the GeForce GTX 960 launched at $199 and now averages $45. The GeForce GTX 960 costs 25% less ($15 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 101.7 (Radeon R9 280X) vs 136.3 (GeForce GTX 960) — the GeForce GTX 960 offers 34% better value. The GeForce GTX 960 is the newer GPU (2015 vs 2013).
| Feature | Radeon R9 280X | GeForce GTX 960 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $299 | $199-33% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $60 | $45-25% |
| Performance per Dollar | 101.7 | 136.3+34% |
| Codename | Tahiti | GM206 |
| Release | October 8 2013 | January 22 2015 |
| Ranking | #404 | #393 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Radeon R9 280X and GeForce GTX 960
