AMD Radeon Pro W5500 vs AMD Radeon R9 280
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon Pro W5500 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), 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), PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Differences
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon Pro W5500
- Videocard is newer: launch date 5 year(s) 11 month(s) later
- Around 50% higher boost clock speed: 1400 MHz vs 933 MHz
- 1178.9x more texture fill rate: 123.2 GTexel/s vs 104.5 GTexel / s
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 7 nm vs 28 nm
- Around 60% lower typical power consumption: 125 Watt vs 200 Watt
- 2.7x more maximum memory size: 8 GB vs 3 GB
- Around 40% higher memory clock speed: 1750 MHz (14000 MHz effective) vs 1250 MHz
- Around 93% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 130.7 vs 67.829
- Around 86% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 2361.73 vs 1266.685
- 2.1x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 13.641 vs 6.495
- Around 70% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 135.462 vs 79.909
- 2.1x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 774.974 vs 365.384
- Around 53% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 12184 vs 7957
- Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3355 vs 3337
- Around 53% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 12184 vs 7957
- Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3355 vs 3337
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 10 Feb 2020 vs 4 March 2014 |
Boost clock speed | 1400 MHz vs 933 MHz |
Texture fill rate | 123.2 GTexel/s vs 104.5 GTexel / s |
Manufacturing process technology | 7 nm vs 28 nm |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 125 Watt vs 200 Watt |
Maximum memory size | 8 GB vs 3 GB |
Memory clock speed | 1750 MHz (14000 MHz effective) vs 1250 MHz |
Benchmarks | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 130.7 vs 67.829 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 2361.73 vs 1266.685 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 13.641 vs 6.495 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 135.462 vs 79.909 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 774.974 vs 365.384 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 12184 vs 7957 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3355 vs 3337 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 12184 vs 7957 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3355 vs 3337 |
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R9 280
- Around 27% higher pipelines: 1792 vs 1408
- Around 7% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3698 vs 3463
- Around 7% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3698 vs 3463
Specifications (specs) | |
Pipelines | 1792 vs 1408 |
Benchmarks | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3698 vs 3463 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3698 vs 3463 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD Radeon Pro W5500
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) |
|
|
||||
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) |
|
|
Name | AMD Radeon Pro W5500 | AMD Radeon R9 280 |
---|---|---|
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 130.7 | 67.829 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 2361.73 | 1266.685 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 13.641 | 6.495 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 135.462 | 79.909 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 774.974 | 365.384 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 12184 | 7957 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3463 | 3698 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3355 | 3337 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 12184 | 7957 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3463 | 3698 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3355 | 3337 |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 5568 | |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 665 | |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 2009 |
Compare specifications (specs)
AMD Radeon Pro W5500 | AMD Radeon R9 280 | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | RDNA 1.0 | GCN 1.0 |
Code name | Navi 14 | Tahiti |
Launch date | 10 Feb 2020 | 4 March 2014 |
Launch price (MSRP) | $399 | $279 |
Place in performance rating | 330 | 422 |
Type | Desktop | Desktop |
Design | AMD Radeon R9 200 Series | |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 1400 MHz | 933 MHz |
Core clock speed | 1187 MHz | |
Manufacturing process technology | 7 nm | 28 nm |
Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance | 246.4 GFLOPS (1:16) | |
Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 7.885 TFLOPS (2:1) | |
Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 3.942 TFLOPS | |
Pipelines | 1408 | 1792 |
Pixel fill rate | 44.80 GPixel/s | |
Texture fill rate | 123.2 GTexel/s | 104.5 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 125 Watt | 200 Watt |
Transistor count | 6400 million | 4,313 million |
Floating-point performance | 3,344 gflops | |
Stream Processors | 1792 | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | 4x DisplayPort | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 2x mini-DisplayPort |
DisplayPort support | ||
Dual-link DVI support | ||
Eyefinity | ||
HDMI | ||
VGA | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Length | 267 mm (10.5 inches) | 275 mm |
Recommended system power (PSU) | 350 Watt | |
Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin | 1 x 6-pin + 1 x 8-pin |
Width | Single-slot | |
Bus support | PCIe 3.0 | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12.1 | 12 |
OpenCL | 2.0 | |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
Shader Model | 6.5 | |
Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 3 GB |
Memory bandwidth | 224 GB/s | 240 GB/s |
Memory bus width | 128 bit | 384 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 1750 MHz (14000 MHz effective) | 1250 MHz |
Memory type | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |
Technologies |
||
AMD Eyefinity | ||
CrossFire | ||
DDMA audio | ||
FreeSync | ||
HD3D | ||
LiquidVR | ||
TressFX | ||
TrueAudio | ||
Unified Video Decoder (UVD) |