AMD Radeon R9 280 vs ATI FirePro V8700
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon R9 280 and ATI FirePro V8700 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 5 year(s) 5 month(s) later
- 3.5x more texture fill rate: 104.5 GTexel / s vs 30 GTexel / s
- 2.2x more pipelines: 1792 vs 800
- 2.8x better floating-point performance: 3,344 gflops vs 1,200.0 gflops
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 28 nm vs 55 nm
- 3x more maximum memory size: 3 GB vs 1 GB
- 3.6x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 5557 vs 1539
- Around 26% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 665 vs 527
- 21.9x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3337 vs 152.6
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 4 March 2014 vs 11 September 2008 |
| Texture fill rate | 104.5 GTexel / s vs 30 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 1792 vs 800 |
| Floating-point performance | 3,344 gflops vs 1,200.0 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm vs 55 nm |
| Maximum memory size | 3 GB vs 1 GB |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 5557 vs 1539 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 665 vs 527 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3337 vs 152.6 |
Reasons to consider the ATI FirePro V8700
- Around 32% lower typical power consumption: 151 Watt vs 200 Watt
- 2.7x more memory clock speed: 3400 MHz vs 1250 MHz
- 2.6x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 8543 vs 3337
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 151 Watt vs 200 Watt |
| Memory clock speed | 3400 MHz vs 1250 MHz |
| Benchmarks | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 8543 vs 3337 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD Radeon R9 280
GPU 2: ATI FirePro V8700
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
| Name | AMD Radeon R9 280 | ATI FirePro V8700 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 5557 | 1539 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 665 | 527 |
| 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 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 7957 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3698 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3337 | 8543 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 7957 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3698 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3337 | 152.6 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 2009 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| AMD Radeon R9 280 | ATI FirePro V8700 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | TeraScale |
| Code name | Tahiti | RV770 |
| Design | AMD Radeon R9 200 Series | |
| Launch date | 4 March 2014 | 11 September 2008 |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $279 | $1,499 |
| Place in performance rating | 431 | 433 |
| Type | Desktop | Workstation |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 933 MHz | |
| Floating-point performance | 3,344 gflops | 1,200.0 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 55 nm |
| Pipelines | 1792 | 800 |
| Stream Processors | 1792 | |
| Texture fill rate | 104.5 GTexel / s | 30 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 200 Watt | 151 Watt |
| Transistor count | 4,313 million | 956 million |
| Core clock speed | 750 MHz | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 2x mini-DisplayPort | 1x DVI, 2x DisplayPort, 1x S-Video |
| DisplayPort support | ||
| Dual-link DVI support | ||
| Eyefinity | ||
| HDMI | ||
| VGA | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Bus support | PCIe 3.0 | |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Length | 275 mm | 254 mm |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1 x 6-pin + 1 x 8-pin | 2x 6-pin |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12 | 10.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 3.3 |
| Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 3 GB | 1 GB |
| Memory bandwidth | 240 GB/s | 108.8 GB / s |
| Memory bus width | 384 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1250 MHz | 3400 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 R9 280 with others
AMDRadeon R9 280 vs
NVIDIAGeForce 9300 + nForce 730i
AMDRadeon R9 280 vs
ATIFirePro V8700
AMDRadeon R9 280 vs
ATIMobility Radeon HD 4350
AMDRadeon R9 280 vs
ATIMobility Radeon HD 5165
AMDRadeon R9 280 vs
ATIMobility Radeon HD 560v
AMDRadeon R9 280 vs
AMDFirePro W7170M
