FirePro W9000 vs Radeon R9 280

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 280 with FirePro W9000, including specs and performance data.

R9 280
2014
3 GB GDDR5, 200 Watt
14.42

W9000 outperforms R9 280 by a moderate 10% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking365341
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation5.410.95
Power efficiency4.943.99
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)
GPU code nameTahitiTahiti
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Designreferenceno data
Release date4 March 2014 (10 years ago)14 June 2012 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$279 $3,999

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

R9 280 has 469% better value for money than FirePro W9000.

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 cores17922048
Core clock speedno data975 MHz
Boost clock speed933 MHzno data
Number of transistors4,313 million4,313 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)200 Watt350 Watt
Texture fill rate104.5124.8
Floating-point processing power3.344 TFLOPS3.994 TFLOPS
ROPs3232
TMUs112128

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
Length275 mm279 mm
Width2-slot2-slot
Form factorno datafull height / full length
Supplementary power connectors1 x 6-pin + 1 x 8-pin1x 6-pin + 1x 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 amount3 GB6 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit384 Bit
Memory clock speed1250 MHz1375 MHz
Memory bandwidth240 GB/s264 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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 2x mini-DisplayPort6x mini-DisplayPort, 1x SDI
Eyefinity+-
HDMI+-
StereoOutput3D-+
Dual-link DVI support-+

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 audio+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212 (11_1)
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan+1.2.131

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 280 14.42
FirePro W9000 15.93
+10.5%

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 280 5558
FirePro W9000 6138
+10.4%

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 14.42 15.93
Recency 4 March 2014 14 June 2012
Maximum RAM amount 3 GB 6 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 200 Watt 350 Watt

R9 280 has an age advantage of 1 year, and 75% lower power consumption.

FirePro W9000, on the other hand, has a 10.5% higher aggregate performance score, and a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

The FirePro W9000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R9 280 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R9 280 is a desktop card while FirePro W9000 is a workstation 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 280
Radeon R9 280
AMD FirePro W9000
FirePro W9000

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


3.6 398 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 5 votes

Rate FirePro W9000 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.