NVIDIA P106-100 vs AMD Radeon R9 280

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA P106-100 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, Geekbench - OpenCL, 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 NVIDIA P106-100

• Videocard is newer: launch date 3 year(s) 3 month(s) later
• Around 83% higher boost clock speed: 1709 MHz vs 933 MHz
• Around 31% higher texture fill rate: 136.7 GTexel / s vs 104.5 GTexel / s
• Around 31% better floating-point performance: 4,375 gflops vs 3,344 gflops
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 16 nm vs 28 nm
• Around 67% lower typical power consumption: 120 Watt vs 200 Watt
• 2x more maximum memory size: 6 GB vs 3 GB
• 6.4x more memory clock speed: 8008 MHz vs 1250 MHz
• Around 16% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 6443 vs 5558
• 2.4x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 163.993 vs 67.829
• Around 35% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1705.321 vs 1266.685
• Around 43% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 9.266 vs 6.495
• Around 23% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 448.036 vs 365.384
• Around 61% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 12824 vs 7957
• Around 61% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 12824 vs 7957
• 2x better performance in 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 4072 vs 2009

Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R9 280

• Around 40% higher pipelines: 1792 vs 1280
• 2.7x better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 665 vs 245
• Around 5% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 79.909 vs 76.32
• Around 99% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3698 vs 1860
• Around 99% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3337 vs 1680
• Around 99% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3698 vs 1860
• Around 99% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3337 vs 1680

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA P106-100
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R9 280

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	6443 5558
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	245 665
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	163.993 67.829
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1705.321 1266.685
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	9.266 6.495
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	76.32 79.909
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	448.036 365.384
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	12824 7957
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1860 3698
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1680 3337
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	12824 7957
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1860 3698
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1680 3337
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score	GPU 1 GPU 2	4072 2009

Compare specifications (specs)