Radeon R9 280 vs HD 7950 |
Released March, 2014
AMD Radeon R9 280
- 827 MHz
- 3 GB GDDR5
7 Out of 10
by hassan-mujtaba (Oct, 2013)The GPU core clock is maintained at 1000 MHz and the boost clock is configured at 1050 MHz.
VS
Released January, 2012
AMD Radeon HD 7950
- 800 MHz
- 3 GB GDDR5
7 Out of 10
by techPowerUp! (Jan, 2012)Thanks to PowerColor's dual fan cooler the card is a lot quieter than the AMD reference design, and runs cooler too - pretty impressive!
GPUBoss Review Our evaluation of R9 280 vs 7950 among Desktop GPUs
Gaming | |
| | |
| Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Bioshock Infinite and 21 more | |
Graphics | |
| | |
| T-Rex, Manhattan, Cloud Gate Factor, Sky Diver Factor and 1 more | |
Computing | |
| | |
| Face Detection, Ocean Surface Simulation and 3 more | |
Performance per Watt | |
| | |
| Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Bioshock Infinite and 32 more | |
Value | |
| | |
| Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Bioshock Infinite and 32 more | |
Noise and Power | |
| | |
| TDP, Idle Power Consumption, Load Power Consumption and 2 more | |
No winner declared
Too close to call
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with GPUBoss?
VS
AMD Radeon R9 280GPUBoss Winner |  | |
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
| Better T-Rex score | 8.22 frames/s | vs | 5.74 frames/s | Around 45% better T-Rex score | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Slightly better floating-point performance | 3,344 GFLOPS | vs | 2,867.2 GFLOPS | More than 15% better floating-point performance | |||
| Better manhattan score | 3,714.8 | vs | 1,857.58 | Around 2x better manhattan score | |||
| Slightly higher texture rate | 104.5 GTexel/s | vs | 89.6 GTexel/s | More than 15% higher texture rate | |||
| Better PassMark direct compute score | 3,208 | vs | 2,725 | Around 20% better PassMark direct compute score | |||
| |||||||
| Slightly better cloud gate factor score | 20.6 | vs | 19.82 | Around 5% better cloud gate factor score | |||
Report a correction
Benchmarks Real world tests of Radeon R9 280 vs HD 7950
Bitcoin mining Data courtesy CompuBench
Face detection Data courtesy CompuBench
Ocean surface simulation Data courtesy CompuBench
T-Rex (GFXBench 3.0) Data courtesy CompuBench
Manhattan (GFXBench 3.0) Data courtesy CompuBench
Fire Strike Factor Data courtesy FutureMark
Sky Diver Factor Data courtesy FutureMark
Cloud Gate Factor Data courtesy FutureMark
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| R9 280 vs 760 | ||
| | VS |  |
| R9 280 vs 960 | ||
| | VS |  |
| R9 280 vs R9 280X | ||
| | VS |  |
| R9 280 vs 1050 Ti | ||
 | VS | |
| 7950 vs 760 | ||
| | VS | |
| 7950 vs 1050 Ti | ||
| | VS | |
| 7950 vs R9 280X | ||
Popular Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| 1050 vs MX150 | ||
 | VS | |
| $281 | ||
| 1060 vs 1050 Ti | ||
| | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| 1060 vs RX 580 | ||
 | VS | |
| $281 | ||
| 970 vs 1060 | ||
| | VS | |
| 970 vs 1050 Ti | ||
| | VS | |
| 1050 vs 1050 Ti | ||
| | VS | |
| 960 vs 1050 Ti | ||
Read more
Comments
Showing 4 comments.
