Tesla P4 vs Radeon HD 8280

Place in the ranking	1177	239
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	3.11	21.51
Architecture	GCN 2.0 (2013−2017)	Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code name	Kalindi	GP104
Market segment	Desktop	Workstation
Release date	18 September 2013 (11 years ago)	13 September 2016 (8 years ago)

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 cores	128	2560
Core clock speed	450 MHz	886 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1114 MHz
Number of transistors	1,178 million	7,200 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	16 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	15 Watt	75 Watt
Texture fill rate	3.600	178.2
Floating-point processing power	0.1152 TFLOPS	5.704 TFLOPS
ROPs	4	64
TMUs	8	160

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).

Interface	IGP	PCIe 3.0 x16
Length	no data	168 mm
Width	IGP	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	None

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 type	System Shared	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	System Shared	8 GB
Memory bus width	System Shared	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	System Shared	1502 MHz
Memory bandwidth	no data	192.3 GB/s
Shared memory	+	-

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

No outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_0)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	6.3	6.4
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	2.0	1.2
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.2.131
CUDA	-	6.1

Synthetic benchmark performance

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. 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.

HD 8280 0.67

Tesla P4 23.14
+3354%

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.

HD 8280 260

Tesla P4 8925
+3333%

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

3−4
−3233%

100−105

+3233%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 −3150%	130−140 +3150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 −3233%	100−105 +3233%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −3233%	100−105 +3233%
Far Cry New Dawn	1−2 −2900%	30−33 +2900%
Hitman 3	5−6 −3300%	170−180 +3300%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−12 −3082%	350−400 +3082%
Red Dead Redemption 2	0−1	0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	6−7 −3233%	200−210 +3233%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−33 −3233%	1000−1050 +3233%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 −3150%	130−140 +3150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 −3233%	100−105 +3233%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −3233%	100−105 +3233%
Far Cry New Dawn	1−2 −2900%	30−33 +2900%
Hitman 3	5−6 −3300%	170−180 +3300%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−12 −3082%	350−400 +3082%
Red Dead Redemption 2	0−1	0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	6−7 −3233%	200−210 +3233%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−11 −2900%	300−310 +2900%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−33 −3233%	1000−1050 +3233%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 −3150%	130−140 +3150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 −3233%	100−105 +3233%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −3233%	100−105 +3233%
Hitman 3	5−6 −3300%	170−180 +3300%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−12 −3082%	350−400 +3082%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	6−7 −3233%	200−210 +3233%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−11 −2900%	300−310 +2900%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−33 −3233%	1000−1050 +3233%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

0−1

1440p
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn

1−2

−2900%

30−33
+2900%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	0−1	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −2900%	30−33 +2900%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −2900%	30−33 +2900%
Hitman 3	6−7 −3233%	200−210 +3233%
Horizon Zero Dawn	3−4 −3233%	100−105 +3233%
Watch Dogs: Legion	2−3 −3150%	65−70 +3150%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

3−4
−3233%

100−105

+3233%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2 −2900%	30−33 +2900%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	0−1	0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

2−3

−3150%

65−70
+3150%

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	0.67	23.14
Recency	18 September 2013	13 September 2016
Chip lithography	28 nm	16 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	15 Watt	75 Watt

HD 8280 has 400% lower power consumption.

Tesla P4, on the other hand, has a 3353.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, and a 75% more advanced lithography process.

The Tesla P4 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 8280 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon HD 8280 is a desktop card while Tesla P4 is a workstation one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.