GPUBoss Review Our evaluation of R9 280X vs 6990 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

6.4

Overall Score

Winner
Radeon R9 280X 

GPUBoss recommends the Radeon R9 280X  based on its compute performance and noise and power.

See full details

Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with GPUBoss?

Thanks for adding your opinion. Follow us on Facebook to stay up to date with the latest news!
VS

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Radeon R9 280X

Reasons to consider the
Generic Radeon R9 280X

Report a correction
Significantly better PassMark score 5,809 vs 2,844 More than 2x better PassMark score
Higher effective memory clock speed 6,000 MHz vs 5,000 MHz 20% higher effective memory clock speed
Better bitcoin mining score 468.39 mHash/s vs 265.3 mHash/s More than 75% better bitcoin mining score
Significantly better PassMark direct compute score 3,677 vs 1,255 Around 3x better PassMark direct compute score
Better sky diver factor score 380.99 vs 340.31 More than 10% better sky diver factor score
Higher memory clock speed 1,500 MHz vs 1,250 MHz 20% higher memory clock speed
Significantly lower TDP 250W vs 375W Around 35% lower TDP
Front view of Radeon HD 6990

Reasons to consider the
Diamond Radeon HD 6990

Report a correction
Is dual GPU Yes vs No About half of graphics cards are dual GPU
Significantly better 3DMark vantage graphics score 27,760 vs 11,255 Around 2.5x better 3DMark vantage graphics score
Better 3DMark06 score 30,500 vs 28,452 More than 5% better 3DMark06 score
Significantly more render output processors 64 vs 32 Twice as many render output processors
Higher memory bandwidth 320 GB/s vs 288 GB/s More than 10% higher memory bandwidth
Better floating-point performance 5,099.6 GFLOPS vs 4,096 GFLOPS Around 25% better floating-point performance
Higher pixel rate 53.12 GPixel/s vs 32 GPixel/s More than 65% higher pixel rate
More memory 4,096 MB vs 3,072 MB Around 35% more memory
Significantly more shading units 3,072 vs 2,048 1024 more shading units
Significantly more texture mapping units 192 vs 128 64 more texture mapping units
Higher texture rate 159.4 GTexel/s vs 128 GTexel/s Around 25% higher texture rate
More compute units 48 vs 32 16 more compute units
Wider memory bus 512 bit vs 384 bit Around 35% wider memory bus

Benchmarks Real world tests of Radeon R9 280X vs HD 6990

Bitcoin mining Data courtesy CompuBench

Radeon R9 280X
468.39 mHash/s
Radeon HD 6990
265.3 mHash/s

Face detection Data courtesy CompuBench

Radeon R9 280X
95.62 mPixels/s
Radeon HD 6990
17.28 mPixels/s

Ocean surface simulation Data courtesy CompuBench

Radeon R9 280X
1,924.31 frames/s
Radeon HD 6990
840.45 frames/s

T-Rex (GFXBench 3.0) Data courtesy CompuBench

Radeon R9 280X
3,356.04
Radeon HD 6990
3,356.28

Manhattan (GFXBench 3.0) Data courtesy CompuBench

Radeon R9 280X
3,709.16
Radeon HD 6990
3,713.7

Fire Strike Factor Data courtesy FutureMark

Sky Diver Factor Data courtesy FutureMark

Cloud Gate Factor Data courtesy FutureMark

Reviews Word on the street

Comments

comments powered by Disqus