RTX 4000 Ada Generation Mobile vs Radeon R9 280

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 280 with RTX 4000 Ada Generation Mobile, including specs and performance data.

R9 280
2014, $279
3 GB GDDR5, 200 Watt
13.23

RTX 4000 Ada Generation Mobile outperforms R9 280 by a whopping 300% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking41865
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation4.72no data
Power efficiency5.0836.87
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2012−2020)Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code nameTahitiAD104
Market segmentDesktopMobile workstation
Designreferenceno data
Release date4 March 2014 (11 years ago)21 March 2023 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$279 no data

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 cores17927424
Core clock speedno data1290 MHz
Boost clock speed933 MHz1665 MHz
Number of transistors4,313 million35,800 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)200 Watt110 Watt
Texture fill rate104.5386.3
Floating-point processing power3.344 TFLOPS24.72 TFLOPS
ROPs3280
TMUs112232
Tensor Coresno data232
Ray Tracing Coresno data58
L1 Cache448 KB7.3 MB
L2 Cache768 KB48 MB

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 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Length275 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1 x 6-pin + 1 x 8-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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount3 GB12 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit192 Bit
Memory clock speed1250 MHz2250 MHz
Memory bandwidth240 GB/s432.0 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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 2x mini-DisplayPortPortable Device Dependent
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 audio+no data

API and SDK support

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.16.8
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.23.0
Vulkan+1.3
CUDA-8.9
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.

R9 280 13.23
RTX 4000 Ada Generation Mobile 52.86
+300%

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 5531
Samples: 3734
RTX 4000 Ada Generation Mobile 22105
+300%
Samples: 381

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 280 8020
RTX 4000 Ada Generation Mobile 40179
+401%

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 13.23 52.86
Recency 4 March 2014 21 March 2023
Maximum RAM amount 3 GB 12 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 200 Watt 110 Watt

RTX 4000 Ada Generation Mobile has a 299.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 460% more advanced lithography process, and 81.8% lower power consumption.

The RTX 4000 Ada Generation Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R9 280 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R9 280 is a desktop graphics card while RTX 4000 Ada Generation Mobile is a mobile workstation 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.


AMD Radeon R9 280
Radeon R9 280
NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation Mobile
RTX 4000 Ada Generation Mobile

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.


3.6 440 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 33 votes

Rate RTX 4000 Ada Generation Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R9 280 or RTX 4000 Ada Generation Mobile, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.