Radeon R9 M280X vs R9 270

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 270 with Radeon R9 M280X, including specs and performance data.

R9 270
2013
2 GB GDDR5, 150 Watt
11.20
+428%

R9 270 outperforms R9 M280X by a whopping 428% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking423876
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation5.08no data
Power efficiency5.15no data
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)GCN 2.0 (2013−2017)
GPU code nameCuracaoSaturn
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Designreferenceno data
Release date13 November 2013 (11 years ago)5 February 2015 (9 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$179 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores1280896
Core clock speedno data1000 MHz
Boost clock speed925 MHzno data
Number of transistors2,800 million2,080 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)150 Wattno data
Texture fill rate74.0061.60
Floating-point processing power2.368 TFLOPS1.971 TFLOPS
ROPs3216
TMUs8056

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 sizeno datalarge
Bus supportPCIe 3.0Not Listed
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length210 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1 x 6-pinno data

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 typeGDDR5Not Listed
Maximum RAM amount2 GB0 MB
Memory bus width256 BitNot Listed
Memory bandwidth179.2 GB/s96 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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPortNo outputs
Eyefinity+-
HDMI+-
DisplayPort support+-

Supported technologies

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

CrossFire+-
FreeSync++
HD3D++
LiquidVR+-
PowerTune-+
DualGraphics-+
TressFX+-
TrueAudio+-
ZeroCore-+
Switchable graphics-+
UVD+-
DDMA audio+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 12DirectX® 11
Shader Model5.16.3
OpenGL4.64.4
OpenCL1.2Not Listed
Vulkan+-
Mantle-+

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.

R9 270 11.20
+428%
R9 M280X 2.12

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.

R9 270 4306
+430%
R9 M280X 813

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.

R9 270 5930
+69.5%
R9 M280X 3498

Gaming performance

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

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD140−150
+400%
28
−400%
4K95−100
+428%
18
−428%

Cost per frame, $

1080p1.28no data
4K1.88no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Dota 2 12
+0%
12
+0%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Fortnite 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30
+0%
30
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 19
+0%
19
+0%
World of Tanks 67
+0%
67
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Dota 2 31
+0%
31
+0%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Grand Theft Auto V 0−1 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
World of Tanks 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Valorant 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 19
+0%
19
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Fortnite 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 0−1 0−1
Valorant 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

This is how R9 270 and R9 M280X compete in popular games:

  • R9 270 is 400% faster in 1080p
  • R9 270 is 428% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 48 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 11.20 2.12
Recency 13 November 2013 5 February 2015

R9 270 has a 428.3% higher aggregate performance score.

R9 M280X, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year.

The Radeon R9 270 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R9 M280X in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R9 270 is a desktop card while Radeon R9 M280X is a notebook one.


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

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.


AMD Radeon R9 270
Radeon R9 270
AMD Radeon R9 M280X
Radeon R9 M280X

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.


3.9 614 votes

Rate Radeon R9 270 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.7 3 votes

Rate Radeon R9 M280X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.