Radeon R9 280X vs R9 270X

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 270X and Radeon R9 280X, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

R9 270X
2013
4 GB GDDR5, 180 Watt
12.69

R9 280X outperforms R9 270X by a significant 20% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking397353
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation5.875.60
Power efficiency4.864.19
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)
GPU code nameCuracaoTahiti
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Designreferencereference
Release date8 October 2013 (11 years ago)8 October 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$199 $299

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

R9 270X has 5% better value for money than R9 280X.

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 cores12802048
Boost clock speed1050 MHz1000 MHz
Number of transistors2,800 million4,313 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)180 Watt250 Watt
Texture fill rate84.00128.0
Floating-point processing power2.688 TFLOPS4.096 TFLOPS
ROPs3232
TMUs80128

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 supportPCIe 3.0PCIe 3.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data275 mm
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors2 x 6-pin1 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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount4 GB3 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit384 Bit
Memory bandwidth179.2 GB/s288 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 DisplayPort2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
Eyefinity++
HDMI++
DisplayPort support++

Supported technologies

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

AppAcceleration++
CrossFire++
FreeSync++
HD3D++
LiquidVR++
TressFX++
TrueAudio++
UVD++
DDMA audio++

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 12DirectX® 12
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan++

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 270X 12.69
R9 280X 15.19
+19.7%

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 270X 4877
R9 280X 5837
+19.7%

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 270X 6560
R9 280X 8343
+27.2%

Unigine Heaven 4.0

This is an old DirectX 11 benchmark, a newer version of Unigine 3.0 with relatively small differences. It displays a fantasy medieval town sprawling over several flying islands. The benchmark is still sometimes used, despite its significant age, as it was released back in 2013.

R9 270X 735
R9 280X 1017
+38.4%

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 HD50−55
−28%
64
+28%
4K27−30
−22.2%
33
+22.2%

Cost per frame, $

1080p3.98
+17.4%
4.67
−17.4%
4K7.37
+22.9%
9.06
−22.9%
  • R9 270X has 17% lower cost per frame in 1080p
  • R9 270X has 23% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 21−24
−18.2%
24−27
+18.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
−20%
30−33
+20%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 40−45
−19.5%
45−50
+19.5%
Counter-Strike 2 21−24
−18.2%
24−27
+18.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
−20%
30−33
+20%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
−21.6%
60−65
+21.6%
Forza Horizon 5 30−35
−21.2%
40−45
+21.2%
Metro Exodus 35−40
−20%
40−45
+20%
Red Dead Redemption 2 30−35
−15.6%
35−40
+15.6%
Valorant 50−55
−19.6%
60−65
+19.6%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 40−45
−19.5%
45−50
+19.5%
Counter-Strike 2 21−24
−18.2%
24−27
+18.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
−20%
30−33
+20%
Dota 2 45−50
+27.8%
36
−27.8%
Far Cry 5 45−50
−14.3%
55−60
+14.3%
Fortnite 70−75
−16.7%
80−85
+16.7%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
−21.6%
60−65
+21.6%
Forza Horizon 5 30−35
−21.2%
40−45
+21.2%
Grand Theft Auto V 45−50
−17.4%
54
+17.4%
Metro Exodus 35−40
−20%
40−45
+20%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 90−95
−16%
100−110
+16%
Red Dead Redemption 2 30−35
−15.6%
35−40
+15.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
−36.8%
52
+36.8%
Valorant 50−55
−19.6%
60−65
+19.6%
World of Tanks 170−180
−13.4%
190−200
+13.4%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 40−45
−19.5%
45−50
+19.5%
Counter-Strike 2 21−24
−18.2%
24−27
+18.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
−20%
30−33
+20%
Dota 2 45−50
−198%
137
+198%
Far Cry 5 45−50
−14.3%
55−60
+14.3%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
−21.6%
60−65
+21.6%
Forza Horizon 5 30−35
−21.2%
40−45
+21.2%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 90−95
−16%
100−110
+16%
Valorant 50−55
−19.6%
60−65
+19.6%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 18−20
−22.2%
21−24
+22.2%
Grand Theft Auto V 18−20
−27.8%
21−24
+27.8%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 85−90
−61.2%
130−140
+61.2%
Red Dead Redemption 2 10−12
−18.2%
12−14
+18.2%
World of Tanks 90−95
−17.8%
100−110
+17.8%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27
−24%
30−35
+24%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
−20%
12−14
+20%
Far Cry 5 27−30
−27.6%
35−40
+27.6%
Forza Horizon 4 30−33
−26.7%
35−40
+26.7%
Forza Horizon 5 20−22
−20%
24−27
+20%
Metro Exodus 24−27
−26.9%
30−35
+26.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
−17.6%
20−22
+17.6%
Valorant 30−35
−22.6%
35−40
+22.6%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 8−9
−37.5%
10−12
+37.5%
Dota 2 21−24
−13%
24−27
+13%
Grand Theft Auto V 21−24
−13%
24−27
+13%
Metro Exodus 8−9
−25%
10−11
+25%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
−21.6%
45−50
+21.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
−25%
10−11
+25%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
−13%
24−27
+13%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14
−16.7%
14−16
+16.7%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
−37.5%
10−12
+37.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Dota 2 21−24
−196%
68
+196%
Far Cry 5 16−18
−18.8%
18−20
+18.8%
Fortnite 14−16
−21.4%
16−18
+21.4%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
−29.4%
21−24
+29.4%
Forza Horizon 5 9−10
−33.3%
12−14
+33.3%
Valorant 12−14
−30.8%
16−18
+30.8%

This is how R9 270X and R9 280X compete in popular games:

  • R9 280X is 28% faster in 1080p
  • R9 280X is 22% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Dota 2, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the R9 270X is 28% faster.
  • in Dota 2, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the R9 280X is 198% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • R9 270X is ahead in 1 test (2%)
  • R9 280X is ahead in 61 test (95%)
  • there's a draw in 2 tests (3%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 12.69 15.19
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 3 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 180 Watt 250 Watt

R9 270X has a 33.3% higher maximum VRAM amount, and 38.9% lower power consumption.

R9 280X, on the other hand, has a 19.7% higher aggregate performance score.

The Radeon R9 280X is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R9 270X in performance tests.


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 270X
Radeon R9 270X
AMD Radeon R9 280X
Radeon R9 280X

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.


4 753 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 704 votes

Rate Radeon R9 280X 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.