AMD Radeon E8950 vs AMD Radeon R9 280
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon E8950 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: 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), PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Differences
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon E8950
- Videocard is newer: launch date 1 year(s) 6 month(s) later
- Around 7% higher boost clock speed: 1000 MHz vs 933 MHz
- Around 22% higher texture fill rate: 128.0 GTexel / s vs 104.5 GTexel / s
- Around 14% higher pipelines: 2048 vs 1792
- Around 22% better floating-point performance: 4,096 gflops vs 3,344 gflops
- 2.1x lower typical power consumption: 95 Watt vs 200 Watt
- 2.7x more maximum memory size: 8 GB vs 3 GB
- 4.8x more memory clock speed: 6000 MHz vs 1250 MHz
- Around 8% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1369.722 vs 1266.685
- Around 2% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 6.633 vs 6.495
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 29 September 2015 vs 4 March 2014 |
| Boost clock speed | 1000 MHz vs 933 MHz |
| Texture fill rate | 128.0 GTexel / s vs 104.5 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 2048 vs 1792 |
| Floating-point performance | 4,096 gflops vs 3,344 gflops |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 95 Watt vs 200 Watt |
| Maximum memory size | 8 GB vs 3 GB |
| Memory clock speed | 6000 MHz vs 1250 MHz |
| Benchmarks | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1369.722 vs 1266.685 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 6.633 vs 6.495 |
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R9 280
- Around 1% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 67.829 vs 66.837
- Around 21% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 79.909 vs 65.836
- Around 12% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 365.384 vs 326.391
| Benchmarks | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 67.829 vs 66.837 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 79.909 vs 65.836 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 365.384 vs 326.391 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD Radeon E8950
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R9 280
| 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) |
|
|
| Name | AMD Radeon E8950 | AMD Radeon R9 280 |
|---|---|---|
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 66.837 | 67.829 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1369.722 | 1266.685 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 6.633 | 6.495 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 65.836 | 79.909 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 326.391 | 365.384 |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 5562 | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 665 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 7957 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3698 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3337 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 7957 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3698 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3337 | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 2009 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| AMD Radeon E8950 | AMD Radeon R9 280 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | GCN 3.0 | GCN 1.0 |
| Code name | Amethyst | Tahiti |
| Launch date | 29 September 2015 | 4 March 2014 |
| Place in performance rating | 734 | 423 |
| Type | Desktop | Desktop |
| Design | AMD Radeon R9 200 Series | |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $279 | |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1000 MHz | 933 MHz |
| Core clock speed | 735 MHz | |
| Floating-point performance | 4,096 gflops | 3,344 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 2048 | 1792 |
| Texture fill rate | 128.0 GTexel / s | 104.5 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 95 Watt | 200 Watt |
| Transistor count | 5,000 million | 4,313 million |
| 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 | MXM-B (3.0) | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| 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 | 8 GB | 3 GB |
| Memory bandwidth | 192.0 GB / s | 240 GB/s |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 384 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 6000 MHz | 1250 MHz |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Technologies |
||
| AMD Eyefinity | ||
| CrossFire | ||
| DDMA audio | ||
| FreeSync | ||
| HD3D | ||
| LiquidVR | ||
| TressFX | ||
| TrueAudio | ||
| Unified Video Decoder (UVD) | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare AMD Radeon E8950 with others
AMDRadeon E8950 vs
ATIMobility FireGL V3200
AMDRadeon E8950 vs
ATIFireGL V3200
AMDRadeon E8950 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 690
AMDRadeon E8950 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 660 Ti
AMDRadeon E8950 vs
NVIDIAGeForce 830A
AMDRadeon E8950 vs
AMDRadeon RX 560D
