GeForce GTX 690 vs Radeon R9 280

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.

Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook

This comparison brings together gaming FPS, raw graphics performance, VRAM, feature set, power efficiency, pricing context, and long-term value so you can see which GPU actually makes more sense.

GeForce GTX 690

2012

Why buy it

✅Competitive enough if your priority is price, power, or specific feature preference.

Trade-offs

❌Lower average FPS than Radeon R9 280 across 21 tracked games in our benchmark data.
❌Less VRAM, with 2 GB vs 3 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
❌Very weak future-proofing: 2012-era hardware with 2 GB of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
❌
258.1% HIGHER MSRP
$999 MSRPvs$279 MSRP
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 5.5 vs 19.8 G3D/$ ($999 MSRP vs $279 MSRP).

Radeon R9 280

2014

Why buy it

✅11.9% more average FPS across 21 tracked games in our benchmark data.
✅Costs $720 less on MSRP ($279 MSRP vs $999 MSRP).
✅Delivers 257.8% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 19.8 vs 5.5 G3D/$ ($279 MSRP vs $999 MSRP).
✅50% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (3 GB vs 2 GB).
✅Draws 200W instead of 300W, a 100W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Very weak future-proofing: 2014-era hardware with 3 GB of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.

GeForce GTX 690

2012

Radeon R9 280

2014

Why buy it

✅Competitive enough if your priority is price, power, or specific feature preference.

Why buy it

✅11.9% more average FPS across 21 tracked games in our benchmark data.
✅Costs $720 less on MSRP ($279 MSRP vs $999 MSRP).
✅Delivers 257.8% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 19.8 vs 5.5 G3D/$ ($279 MSRP vs $999 MSRP).
✅50% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (3 GB vs 2 GB).
✅Draws 200W instead of 300W, a 100W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower average FPS than Radeon R9 280 across 21 tracked games in our benchmark data.
❌Less VRAM, with 2 GB vs 3 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
❌Very weak future-proofing: 2012-era hardware with 2 GB of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
❌
258.1% HIGHER MSRP
$999 MSRPvs$279 MSRP
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 5.5 vs 19.8 G3D/$ ($999 MSRP vs $279 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Very weak future-proofing: 2014-era hardware with 3 GB of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.

Quick Answers

So, is Radeon R9 280 better than GeForce GTX 690?

Yes. Radeon R9 280 is the better GPU overall here. You are getting 11.9% more average FPS across 21 tracked games in our benchmark data, 0.1% higher PassMark G3D performance, and 3 GB vs 2 GB of VRAM. It also comes from 2014 instead of 2012, which helps its case as the more complete modern gaming card.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

GeForce GTX 690 is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting the stronger feature stack with no meaningful modern upscaling stack instead of FSR upscaling. That broader feature stack should age better as more games lean on modern upscaling and frame-generation support.

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper card?

Radeon R9 280 is the smarter buy today, but it is not as lopsided as a simple winner label makes it sound. Radeon R9 280 is about $720 cheaper on MSRP at $279 MSRP versus $999 MSRP, and you are getting 11.9% more estimated average FPS across 21 tracked games in our benchmark data and a lower G3D Mark (5,532 vs 5,536). It also leads G3D-per-dollar by 257.8%. GeForce GTX 690 is the more forward-looking alternative, so it still has a real case if you care more about future-proofing than about squeezing out the strongest gaming value today.

When does GeForce GTX 690 make more sense than Radeon R9 280?

Yes. GeForce GTX 690 is still an excellent gaming GPU in 2026: it is still comfortable for 1080p and decent for 1440p, though 4K is more situational. It makes more sense if your priority is future-proofing and staying closer to $999 MSRP more than squeezing out the extra headroom of Radeon R9 280. The trade-off is that Radeon R9 280 currently gives you a lower G3D Mark (5,532 vs 5,536) and 11.9% more estimated average FPS across 21 tracked games in our benchmark data. It also leads G3D-per-dollar by 257.8%.

Games Benchmarks

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 9800X3D 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.

GeForce GTX 690 Benchmark Check

Radeon R9 280 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	GeForce GTX 690	Radeon R9 280
1080p
low	77 FPS	77 FPS
medium	63 FPS	63 FPS
high	48 FPS	50 FPS
ultra	32 FPS	33 FPS
1440p
low	64 FPS	65 FPS
medium	54 FPS	54 FPS
high	37 FPS	38 FPS
ultra	23 FPS	24 FPS
4K
low	24 FPS	24 FPS
medium	23 FPS	23 FPS
high	14 FPS	14 FPS
ultra	12 FPS	12 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 690 Open Radeon R9 280

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	GeForce GTX 690	Radeon R9 280
1080p
low	116 FPS	129 FPS
medium	88 FPS	100 FPS
high	67 FPS	79 FPS
ultra	43 FPS	53 FPS
1440p
low	65 FPS	73 FPS
medium	45 FPS	53 FPS
high	33 FPS	39 FPS
ultra	23 FPS	28 FPS
4K
low	23 FPS	28 FPS
medium	16 FPS	20 FPS
high	13 FPS	16 FPS
ultra	9 FPS	11 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 690 Open Radeon R9 280

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	GeForce GTX 690	Radeon R9 280
1080p
low	249 FPS	249 FPS
medium	199 FPS	199 FPS
high	166 FPS	166 FPS
ultra	125 FPS	124 FPS
1440p
low	187 FPS	187 FPS
medium	149 FPS	149 FPS
high	125 FPS	124 FPS
ultra	93 FPS	93 FPS
4K
low	125 FPS	124 FPS
medium	100 FPS	100 FPS
high	83 FPS	83 FPS
ultra	62 FPS	62 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 690 Open Radeon R9 280

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	GeForce GTX 690	Radeon R9 280
1080p
low	126 FPS	140 FPS
medium	99 FPS	116 FPS
high	85 FPS	100 FPS
ultra	70 FPS	85 FPS
1440p
low	96 FPS	103 FPS
medium	78 FPS	85 FPS
high	67 FPS	74 FPS
ultra	50 FPS	59 FPS
4K
low	57 FPS	62 FPS
medium	43 FPS	48 FPS
high	34 FPS	38 FPS
ultra	24 FPS	27 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 690 Open Radeon R9 280

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 690 and Radeon R9 280

GeForce GTX 690

The GeForce GTX 690 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in May 3 2012. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock ranges from 915 MHz to 1019 MHz. It has 3072 ×2 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 300W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 5,536 points. Launch price was $999.

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 GeForce GTX 690 scores 5,536 and the Radeon R9 280 reaches 5,532 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.1% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 690 is built on Kepler while the Radeon R9 280 uses GCN 1.0, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 3,072 (GeForce GTX 690) vs 1,792 (Radeon R9 280). Raw compute: 3.13 TFLOPS ×2 (GeForce GTX 690) vs 3.344 TFLOPS (Radeon R9 280). Boost clocks: 1019 MHz vs 933 MHz.

Feature	GeForce GTX 690	Radeon R9 280
G3D Mark Score	5,536	5,532
Architecture	Kepler	GCN 1.0
Process Node	28 nm	28 nm
Shading Units	3072 ×2+71%	1792
Compute (TFLOPS)	3.13 TFLOPS ×2	3.344 TFLOPS+7%
Boost Clock	1019 MHz+9%	933 MHz
ROPs	32 ×2	32
TMUs	128 ×2+14%	112
L1 Cache	128 KB	448 KB+250%
L2 Cache	512 KB	768 KB+50%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

The GeForce GTX 690 gives access to NVIDIA DLSS (Deep Learning Super Sampling), widely regarding as the superior upscaling method for image quality. The Radeon R9 280 relies on FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution), which is capable but generally slightly noisier than DLSS in motion.

Feature	GeForce GTX 690	Radeon R9 280
Upscaling Tech	Upscaling support	FSR Upscaling / FSR 4
Frame Generation	Not Supported	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	NVIDIA Reflex	AMD Anti-Lag

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The GeForce GTX 690 comes with 2 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon R9 280 has 3 GB. The Radeon R9 280 offers 50% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Memory bandwidth: 192.2 GB/s x2 (GeForce GTX 690) vs 240 GB/s (Radeon R9 280) — a 24.9% advantage for the Radeon R9 280. Bus width: 256-bit x2 vs 384-bit. L2 Cache: 512 KB (GeForce GTX 690) vs 768 KB (Radeon R9 280) — the Radeon R9 280 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GTX 690	Radeon R9 280
VRAM Capacity	2 GB	3 GB+50%
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Memory Bandwidth	192.2 GB/s x2	240 GB/s+25%
Bus Width	256-bit x2	384-bit+50%
L2 Cache	512 KB	768 KB+50%

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 690 draws 300W versus the Radeon R9 280's 200W — a 40% difference. The Radeon R9 280 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 650W (GeForce GTX 690) vs 500W (Radeon R9 280). Power connectors: 2x 8-pin vs 6-pin + 8-pin.

Feature	GeForce GTX 690	Radeon R9 280
TDP	300W	200W-33%
Recommended PSU	650W	500W-23%
Power Connector	2x 8-pin	6-pin + 8-pin
Length	279mm	—
Slots	2	—
Perf/Watt	18.5	27.7+50%

💰

Value Analysis

The GeForce GTX 690 launched at $999 MSRP, while the Radeon R9 280 launched at $279. The Radeon R9 280 costs 72.1% less ($720 savings) on MSRP. Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 5.5 (GeForce GTX 690) vs 19.8 (Radeon R9 280) — the Radeon R9 280 offers 260% better value. The Radeon R9 280 is the newer GPU (2014 vs 2012).