Winner
Radeon R9 280X
GPUBoss recommends the Radeon R9 280X based on its compute performance.
See full details Radeon R9 280X vs 270X |
VS
GPUBoss Review Our evaluation of R9 280X vs R9 270X 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 | Overall Score |
| | |
 | Winner |
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with GPUBoss?
VS
Generic Radeon R9 280XGPUBoss Winner |  | |
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
| Significantly higher memory bandwidth | 288 GB/s | vs | 192 GB/s | 50% higher memory bandwidth | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Better 3DMark06 score | 28,452 | vs | 23,610 | More than 20% better 3DMark06 score | |||
| Better PassMark score | 5,809 | vs | 4,658 | Around 25% better PassMark score | |||
| Better 3DMark 11 graphics score | 10,792 | vs | 8,520 | More than 25% better 3DMark 11 graphics score | |||
| Better floating-point performance | 4,096 GFLOPS | vs | 2,944 GFLOPS | Around 40% better floating-point performance | |||
| More memory | 3,072 MB | vs | 2,048 MB | 50% more memory | |||
| Higher texture rate | 128 GTexel/s | vs | 92 GTexel/s | Around 40% higher texture rate | |||
| More shading units | 2,048 | vs | 1,280 | 768 more shading units | |||
| More texture mapping units | 128 | vs | 80 | 48 more texture mapping units | |||
| Significantly better bitcoin mining score | 468.39 mHash/s | vs | 251.26 mHash/s | More than 85% better bitcoin mining score | |||
| Significantly better PassMark direct compute score | 3,677 | vs | 1,062 | Around 3.5x better PassMark direct compute score | |||
| More compute units | 32 | vs | 20 | 12 more compute units | |||
| Wider memory bus | 384 bit | vs | 256 bit | 50% wider memory bus | |||
| Better sky diver factor score | 380.99 | vs | 338.41 | Around 15% better sky diver factor score | |||
| Higher BioShock infinite framerate | 73.9 fps | vs | 55.1 fps | Around 35% higher BioShock infinite framerate | |||
| |||||||
| Significantly better 3DMark vantage graphics score | 28,000 | vs | 11,255 | Around 2.5x better 3DMark vantage graphics score | |||
| Higher clock speed | 1,100 MHz | vs | 850 MHz | Around 30% higher clock speed | |||
| Higher turbo clock speed | 1,150 MHz | vs | 1,000 MHz | 15% higher turbo clock speed | |||
| Higher crysis 3 framerate | 24.5 fps | vs | 13.1 fps | More than 85% higher crysis 3 framerate | |||
| Lower TDP | 180W | vs | 250W | Around 30% lower TDP | |||
Report a correction
Benchmarks Real world tests of Radeon R9 280X vs 270X
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
Reviews Word on the street
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| 770 vs R9 280X | ||
 | VS | |
| 960 vs R9 280X | ||
 | VS | |
| 760 vs R9 280X | ||
 | VS | |
| 970 vs R9 280X | ||
 | VS |  |
| $274 | ||
| 750 Ti vs R9 270X | ||
| | VS | |
| 760 vs R9 270X | ||
| | VS | |
| 960 vs R9 270X | ||
Popular Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $304 | ||
| 1050 Ti vs 1060 | ||
| | VS | |
| 960 vs 970 | ||
| | VS | |
| $304 | ||
| 1060 vs 970 | ||
 | VS | |
| R9 380 vs 960 | ||
 | VS | |
| R9 390 vs 970 | ||
| | VS |  |
| 970 vs R9 290X | ||
| | VS | |
| $274 | ||
| 960 vs 750 Ti | ||
Read more
Comments
Showing 5 comments.
