AMD Radeon Pro V340 MxGPU vs AMD Radeon R9 280
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon Pro V340 MxGPU 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, 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 Radeon Pro V340 MxGPU
- Videocard is newer: launch date 4 year(s) 5 month(s) later
- Around 7% higher boost clock speed: 1000 MHz vs 933 MHz
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 28 nm
- Around 60% higher memory clock speed: 2000 MHz vs 1250 MHz
- Around 88% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 6937 vs 3698
- Around 88% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 6937 vs 3698
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 26 August 2018 vs 4 March 2014 |
Boost clock speed | 1000 MHz vs 933 MHz |
Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm vs 28 nm |
Memory clock speed | 2000 MHz vs 1250 MHz |
Benchmarks | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 6937 vs 3698 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 6937 vs 3698 |
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R9 280
- Around 50% lower typical power consumption: 200 Watt vs 300 Watt
- Around 94% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 5543 vs 2853
- 5.7x better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 667 vs 118
- Around 7% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 7957 vs 7410
- Around 7% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 7957 vs 7410
- Around 26% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3337 vs 2647
- Around 26% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3337 vs 2647
Specifications (specs) | |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 200 Watt vs 300 Watt |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 5543 vs 2853 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 667 vs 118 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 7957 vs 7410 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 7957 vs 7410 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3337 vs 2647 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3337 vs 2647 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD Radeon Pro V340 MxGPU
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 Radeon Pro V340 MxGPU | AMD Radeon R9 280 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 2853 | 5543 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 118 | 667 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 7410 | 7957 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 7410 | 7957 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 6937 | 3698 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 6937 | 3698 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 2647 | 3337 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2647 | 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 Radeon Pro V340 MxGPU | AMD Radeon R9 280 | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | GCN 5.0 | GCN 1.0 |
Code name | Vega 10 | Tahiti |
Launch date | 26 August 2018 | 4 March 2014 |
Place in performance rating | 426 | 427 |
Type | Workstation | Desktop |
Design | AMD Radeon R9 200 Series | |
Launch price (MSRP) | $279 | |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 1000 MHz | 933 MHz |
Core clock speed | 852 MHz | |
Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 28 nm |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 300 Watt | 200 Watt |
Transistor count | 12,500 million | 4,313 million |
Floating-point performance | 3,344 gflops | |
Pipelines | 1792 | |
Stream Processors | 1792 | |
Texture fill rate | 104.5 GTexel / s | |
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 |
Length | 267 mm | 275 mm |
Supplementary power connectors | 2x 8-pin | 1 x 6-pin + 1 x 8-pin |
Bus support | PCIe 3.0 | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 12 |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
Memory clock speed | 2000 MHz | 1250 MHz |
Maximum RAM amount | 3 GB | |
Memory bandwidth | 240 GB/s | |
Memory bus width | 384 Bit | |
Memory type | GDDR5 | |
Technologies |
||
AMD Eyefinity | ||
CrossFire | ||
DDMA audio | ||
FreeSync | ||
HD3D | ||
LiquidVR | ||
TressFX | ||
TrueAudio | ||
Unified Video Decoder (UVD) |