AMD FirePro W7170M vs AMD Radeon R9 280
Comparative analysis of AMD FirePro W7170M and AMD Radeon R9 280 videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Technologies. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Differences
Reasons to consider the AMD FirePro W7170M
- Videocard is newer: launch date 1 year(s) 6 month(s) later
- Around 14% higher pipelines: 2048 vs 1792
- 2x lower typical power consumption: 100 Watt vs 200 Watt
- Around 33% higher maximum memory size: 4 GB vs 3 GB
- 4x more memory clock speed: 5000 MHz vs 1250 MHz
- Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3722 vs 3698
- Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3722 vs 3698
- Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3362 vs 3337
- Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3362 vs 3337
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 2 October 2015 vs 4 March 2014 |
Pipelines | 2048 vs 1792 |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 100 Watt vs 200 Watt |
Maximum memory size | 4 GB vs 3 GB |
Memory clock speed | 5000 MHz vs 1250 MHz |
Benchmarks | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3722 vs 3698 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3722 vs 3698 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3362 vs 3337 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3362 vs 3337 |
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R9 280
- Around 13% higher texture fill rate: 104.5 GTexel / s vs 92.54 GTexel / s
- Around 13% better floating-point performance: 3,344 gflops vs 2,961 gflops
- Around 76% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 5558 vs 3162
- Around 59% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 665 vs 418
- Around 17% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 7957 vs 6796
- Around 17% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 7957 vs 6796
Specifications (specs) | |
Texture fill rate | 104.5 GTexel / s vs 92.54 GTexel / s |
Floating-point performance | 3,344 gflops vs 2,961 gflops |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 5558 vs 3162 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 665 vs 418 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 7957 vs 6796 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 7957 vs 6796 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD FirePro W7170M
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R9 280
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
Name | AMD FirePro W7170M | AMD Radeon R9 280 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 3162 | 5558 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 418 | 665 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 50809 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 6796 | 7957 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 6796 | 7957 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3722 | 3698 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3722 | 3698 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3362 | 3337 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3362 | 3337 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 67.829 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1266.685 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 6.495 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 79.909 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 365.384 | |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 2009 |
Compare specifications (specs)
AMD FirePro W7170M | AMD Radeon R9 280 | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | GCN 3.0 | GCN 1.0 |
Code name | Amethyst | Tahiti |
Launch date | 2 October 2015 | 4 March 2014 |
Place in performance rating | 429 | 432 |
Type | Mobile workstation | Desktop |
Design | AMD Radeon R9 200 Series | |
Launch price (MSRP) | $279 | |
Technical info |
||
Core clock speed | 723 MHz | |
Floating-point performance | 2,961 gflops | 3,344 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
Pipelines | 2048 | 1792 |
Texture fill rate | 92.54 GTexel / s | 104.5 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 100 Watt | 200 Watt |
Transistor count | 5,000 million | 4,313 million |
Boost clock speed | 933 MHz | |
Stream Processors | 1792 | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | No outputs | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 2x mini-DisplayPort |
DisplayPort support | ||
Dual-link DVI support | ||
Eyefinity | ||
HDMI | ||
VGA | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Laptop size | large | |
Supplementary power connectors | None | 1 x 6-pin + 1 x 8-pin |
Bus support | PCIe 3.0 | |
Length | 275 mm | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (12_0) | 12 |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 3 GB |
Memory bandwidth | 160.0 GB / s | 240 GB/s |
Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 384 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 5000 MHz | 1250 MHz |
Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Shared memory | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
AMD Eyefinity | ||
AppAcceleration | ||
Enduro | ||
CrossFire | ||
DDMA audio | ||
FreeSync | ||
HD3D | ||
LiquidVR | ||
TressFX | ||
TrueAudio | ||
Unified Video Decoder (UVD) |