Radeon R9 280 vs RTX 5000 Ada Generation Mobile

Aggregate performance score

We've compared RTX 5000 Ada Generation Mobile with Radeon R9 280, including specs and performance data.

RTX 5000 Ada Generation Mobile
2023
16 GB GDDR6, 120 Watt
55.90
+323%

RTX 5000 Ada Generation Mobile outperforms R9 280 by a whopping 323% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking50418
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data4.71
Power efficiency35.805.08
ArchitectureAda Lovelace (2022−2024)GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)
GPU code nameAD103Tahiti
Market segmentMobile workstationDesktop
Designno datareference
Release date21 March 2023 (2 years ago)4 March 2014 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$279

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores97281792
Core clock speed1425 MHzno data
Boost clock speed2115 MHz933 MHz
Number of transistors45,900 million4,313 million
Manufacturing process technology5 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)120 Watt200 Watt
Texture fill rate643.0104.5
Floating-point processing power41.15 TFLOPS3.344 TFLOPS
ROPs11232
TMUs304112
Tensor Cores304no data
Ray Tracing Cores76no data
L1 Cache9.5 MB448 KB
L2 Cache64 MB768 KB

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).

Laptop sizelargeno data
Bus supportno dataPCIe 3.0
InterfacePCIe 4.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data275 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data1 x 6-pin + 1 x 8-pin

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeGDDR6GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount16 GB3 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit384 Bit
Memory clock speed2250 MHz1250 MHz
Memory bandwidth576.0 GB/s240 GB/s
Shared memory--
Resizable BAR+-

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display ConnectorsPortable Device Dependent2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 2x mini-DisplayPort
Eyefinity-+
HDMI-+

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

CrossFire-+
FreeSync-+
HD3D-+
LiquidVR-+
TressFX-+
TrueAudio-+
UVD-+
DDMA audiono data+

API and SDK support

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_2)DirectX® 12
Shader Model6.85.1
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL3.01.2
Vulkan1.3+
CUDA8.9-
DLSS+-

Synthetic benchmarks

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score.

RTX 5000 Ada Generation Mobile 55.90
+323%
R9 280 13.23

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. 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.

RTX 5000 Ada Generation Mobile 23379
+323%
Samples: 343
R9 280 5531
Samples: 3727

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.

RTX 5000 Ada Generation Mobile 30422
+279%
R9 280 8020

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 55.90 13.23
Recency 21 March 2023 4 March 2014
Maximum RAM amount 16 GB 3 GB
Chip lithography 5 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 120 Watt 200 Watt

RTX 5000 Ada Generation Mobile has a 322.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, a 433.3% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 460% more advanced lithography process, and 66.7% lower power consumption.

The RTX 5000 Ada Generation Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R9 280 in performance tests.

Be aware that RTX 5000 Ada Generation Mobile is a mobile workstation graphics card while Radeon R9 280 is a desktop one.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA RTX 5000 Ada Generation Mobile
RTX 5000 Ada Generation Mobile
AMD Radeon R9 280
Radeon R9 280

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


2.5 69 votes

Rate RTX 5000 Ada Generation Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 439 votes

Rate Radeon R9 280 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about RTX 5000 Ada Generation Mobile or Radeon R9 280, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.