AMD Radeon R9 380 versus AMD Radeon R9 280X
Comparaison des cartes vidéo AMD Radeon R9 380 and AMD Radeon R9 280X pour tous les caractéristiques connus dans les catégories suivants: Essentiel, Infos techniques, Sorties et ports de vidéo, Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences, Soutien API, Mémoire, Technologies. Analyse du performance de référence des cartes vidéo: 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), 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, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s).
Différences
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon R9 380
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 1 ans 8 mois plus tard
- Environ 32% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 190 Watt versus 250 Watt
- Environ 33% plus de taille maximale de mémoire: 4 GB versus 3 GB
- Environ 5% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1503.633 versus 1434.496
- Environ 19% meilleur performance en 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 2791 versus 2347
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 18 June 2015 versus 8 October 2013 |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 190 Watt versus 250 Watt |
| Taille de mémore maximale | 4 GB versus 3 GB |
| Référence | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1503.633 versus 1434.496 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3718 versus 3700 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3359 versus 3357 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3718 versus 3700 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3359 versus 3357 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 2791 versus 2347 |
Raisons pour considerer le AMD Radeon R9 280X
- Environ 3% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1000 MHz versus 970 MHz
- Environ 18% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 128.0 GTexel / s versus 108.6 GTexel / s
- Environ 14% de pipelines plus haut: 2048 versus 1792
- Environ 18% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 4,096 gflops versus 3,476 gflops
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 6211 versus 6153
- Environ 5% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 686 versus 656
- Environ 53% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 89.187 versus 58.135
- Environ 26% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 9603 versus 7635
- Environ 26% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 9603 versus 7635
| Caractéristiques | |
| Vitesse augmenté | 1000 MHz versus 970 MHz |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 128.0 GTexel / s versus 108.6 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 2048 versus 1792 |
| Performance á point flottant | 4,096 gflops versus 3,476 gflops |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 6211 versus 6153 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 686 versus 656 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 89.187 versus 58.135 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 9603 versus 7635 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 9603 versus 7635 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: AMD Radeon R9 380
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R9 280X
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/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 |
|
|
| Nom | AMD Radeon R9 380 | AMD Radeon R9 280X |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 6153 | 6211 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 656 | 686 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 76397 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 58.135 | 89.187 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1503.633 | 1434.496 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 7635 | 9603 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3718 | 3700 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3359 | 3357 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 7635 | 9603 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3718 | 3700 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3359 | 3357 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 2791 | 2347 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 7.656 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 87.459 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 493.57 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| AMD Radeon R9 380 | AMD Radeon R9 280X | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | GCN 3.0 | GCN 1.0 |
| Nom de code | Antigua | Tahiti |
| Conception | AMD Radeon R9 300 Series | AMD Radeon R9 200 Series |
| Date de sortie | 18 June 2015 | 8 October 2013 |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $199 | $299 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 373 | 378 |
| Prix maintenant | $264.99 | |
| Genre | Desktop | Desktop |
| Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 31.71 | |
Infos techniques |
||
| Vitesse augmenté | 970 MHz | 1000 MHz |
| Unités de Compute | 28 | |
| Performance á point flottant | 3,476 gflops | 4,096 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 1792 | 2048 |
| Stream Processors | 1792 | 2048 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 108.6 GTexel / s | 128.0 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 190 Watt | 250 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 5,000 million | 4,313 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Connecteurs d’écran | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort |
| Soutien de DisplayPort | ||
| Soutien de Dual-link DVI | ||
| Eyefinity | ||
| HDMI | ||
| Nombre d’écrans Eyefinity | 6 | |
| VGA | ||
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Bridgeless CrossFire | ||
| Soutien de bus | PCIe 3.0 | PCIe 3.0 |
| Facteur de forme | Full Height / Full Length Dual Slot | |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Longeur | 221 mm | 275 mm |
| Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | 2 x 6-pin | 1 x 6-pin + 1 x 8-pin |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12 | 12 |
| Mantle | ||
| OpenCL | 2.0 | |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
| Vulkan | ||
Mémoire |
||
| Mémoire de la bande passante haute (HBM) | ||
| RAM maximale | 4 GB | 3 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 182.4 GB/s | 288 GB/s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 256 bit | 384 Bit |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 970 MHz | |
| Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Mémoire partagé | 0 | 0 |
Technologies |
||
| AMD Eyefinity | ||
| CrossFire | ||
| DDMA audio | ||
| FreeSync | ||
| FRTC | ||
| HD3D | ||
| HDMI 4K Support | ||
| LiquidVR | ||
| PowerTune | ||
| TrueAudio | ||
| Video Code Engine (VCE) | ||
| Virtual Super Resolution (VSR) | ||
| ZeroCore | ||
| AppAcceleration | ||
| TressFX | ||
| Unified Video Decoder (UVD) | ||
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer AMD Radeon R9 380 avec des autres
AMDRadeon R9 380 vs
ATIRadeon X800 GT
AMDRadeon R9 380 vs
NVIDIAGeForce 7950 GX2
AMDRadeon R9 380 vs
ATIRadeon HD 2900 XT
AMDRadeon R9 380 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTS 150M
AMDRadeon R9 380 vs
AMDRadeon R9 M365X
AMDRadeon R9 380 vs
IntelArc A570M
