Radeon R9 280 vs GeForce GTX TITAN Z
Aggregated performance score
GeForce GTX TITAN Z outperforms Radeon R9 280 by 62% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
Primary Details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in performance ranking | 219 | 334 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation | 2.54 | 10.99 |
| Architecture | Kepler (2012−2018) | GCN 1.0 (2012−2020) |
| GPU code name | GK110B | Tahiti |
| Market segment | Desktop | Desktop |
| Design | no data | reference |
| Release date | 28 May 2014 (9 years ago) | 4 March 2014 (10 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $2,999 | $279 |
| Current price | $830 (0.3x MSRP) | $91 (0.3x MSRP) |
Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation
Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
R9 280 has 333% better value for money than GTX TITAN Z.
Detailed Specifications
General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 2880 | 1792 |
| CUDA cores | 5760 | no data |
| Core clock speed | 705 MHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 876 MHz | 933 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 7,080 million | 4,313 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 375 Watt | 200 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 338 billion/sec | 104.5 |
| Floating-point performance | 2x 5,046 gflops | 3,344 gflops |
Form Factor & Compatibility
Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).
| Bus support | PCI Express 3.0 | PCIe 3.0 |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Length | 10.5" (26.7 cm) | 275 mm |
| Height | 4.376" (11.1 cm) | no data |
| Width | 3-slot | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | Two 8-pin | 1 x 6-pin + 1 x 8-pin |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 12 GB | 3 GB |
| Memory bus width | 768-bit (384-bit per GPU) | 384 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 7.0 GB/s | 1250 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 672 GB/s | 240 GB/s |
Connectivity and Outputs
Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.
| Display Connectors | One Dual Link DVI-I, One Dual Link DVI-D, One HDMI, One DisplayPort | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 2x mini-DisplayPort |
| Multi monitor support | 4 displays | no data |
| Eyefinity | no data | 1 |
| HDMI | + | + |
| HDCP | + | no data |
| Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | no data |
| DisplayPort support | no data | - |
| Audio input for HDMI | Internal | no data |
Supported GPU Technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| AppAcceleration | no data | - |
| CrossFire | no data | 1 |
| Enduro | no data | - |
| FreeSync | no data | 1 |
| HD3D | no data | + |
| LiquidVR | no data | 1 |
| PowerTune | no data | - |
| TressFX | no data | 1 |
| TrueAudio | no data | + |
| ZeroCore | no data | - |
| UVD | no data | + |
| DDMA audio | no data | + |
| Blu Ray 3D | + | no data |
| 3D Gaming | + | no data |
| 3D Vision | + | no data |
| 3D Vision Live | + | no data |
API Compatibility
List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (11_1) | DirectX® 12 |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.4 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | 1.1.126 | + |
| Mantle | no data | - |
| CUDA | + | no data |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark performance score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.
GeForce GTX TITAN Z outperforms Radeon R9 280 by 62% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
Passmark
This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.
Benchmark coverage: 25%
GeForce GTX TITAN Z outperforms Radeon R9 280 by 62% in Passmark.
3DMark Fire Strike Graphics
Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.
Benchmark coverage: 14%
GeForce GTX TITAN Z outperforms Radeon R9 280 by 114% in 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics.
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Pros & Cons Summary
| Performance score | 23.21 | 14.37 |
| Recency | 28 May 2014 | 4 March 2014 |
| Cost | $2999 | $279 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 12 GB | 3 GB |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 375 Watt | 200 Watt |
The GeForce GTX TITAN Z is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R9 280 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Comparisons with Similar GPUs
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
