AMD Radeon R9 280 vs ATI FireGL V8650

Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon R9 280 and ATI FireGL V8650 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, 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), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.

 

Differences

Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R9 280

• Videocard is newer: launch date 6 year(s) 9 month(s) later
• 9.5x more texture fill rate: 104.5 GTexel / s vs 11.01 GTexel / s
• 5.6x more pipelines: 1792 vs 320
• 7.6x better floating-point performance: 3,344 gflops vs 440.3 gflops
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 28 nm vs 80 nm
• Around 50% higher maximum memory size: 3 GB vs 2 GB
• 10.1x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 5563 vs 550
• Around 4% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 665 vs 637

Reasons to consider the ATI FireGL V8650

• Around 39% higher memory clock speed: 1736 MHz vs 1250 MHz
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3357 vs 3337
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3357 vs 3337

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: AMD Radeon R9 280
GPU 2: ATI FireGL V8650

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	5563 550
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	665 637
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3337 3357
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3337 3357

Compare specifications (specs)