Radeon PRO WX 3100 vs R9 280

Place in the ranking	365	566
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	5.35	5.02
Power efficiency	4.97	7.09
Architecture	GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)	GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)
GPU code name	Tahiti	Lexa
Market segment	Desktop	Workstation
Design	reference	no data
Release date	4 March 2014 (10 years ago)	12 June 2017 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$279	$199

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

R9 280 has 7% better value for money than PRO WX 3100.

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	1792	512
Core clock speed	no data	925 MHz
Boost clock speed	933 MHz	1219 MHz
Number of transistors	4,313 million	2,200 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	200 Watt	65 Watt
Texture fill rate	104.5	39.01
Floating-point processing power	3.344 TFLOPS	1.248 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	16
TMUs	112	32

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 support	PCIe 3.0	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x8
Length	275 mm	145 mm
Width	2-slot	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	1 x 6-pin + 1 x 8-pin	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	GDDR5	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	3 GB	4 GB
Memory bus width	384 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	1250 MHz	1500 MHz
Memory bandwidth	240 GB/s	96 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	2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 2x mini-DisplayPort	1x DisplayPort, 2x mini-DisplayPort
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 compatibility

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

DirectX	DirectX® 12	12 (12_0)
Shader Model	5.1	6.4
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	2.0
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 14.45
+116%

PRO WX 3100 6.69

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 5556
+116%

PRO WX 3100 2573

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
+200%

PRO WX 3100 2671

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 HD

27−30
+108%

−108%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

10.33
+48.1%

15.31

−48.1%

R9 280 has 48% lower cost per frame in 1080p

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Elden Ring	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Metro Exodus	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Valorant	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Dota 2	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Elden Ring	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Far Cry 5	30−33 +0%	30−33 +0%
Fortnite	25 +0%	25 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Metro Exodus	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Valorant	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
World of Tanks	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Dota 2	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Far Cry 5	30−33 +0%	30−33 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%
Valorant	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Elden Ring	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
World of Tanks	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Far Cry 5	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Metro Exodus	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Valorant	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	0−1	0−1
Dota 2	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Elden Ring	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Metro Exodus	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	0−1	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Dota 2	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Far Cry 5	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Fortnite	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Valorant	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%

This is how R9 280 and PRO WX 3100 compete in popular games:

R9 280 is 108% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 61 test (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	14.45	6.69
Recency	4 March 2014	12 June 2017
Maximum RAM amount	3 GB	4 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	200 Watt	65 Watt

R9 280 has a 116% higher aggregate performance score.

PRO WX 3100, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years, a 33.3% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 207.7% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R9 280 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon PRO WX 3100 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R9 280 is a desktop card while Radeon PRO WX 3100 is a workstation one.

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