FirePro 2270 PCIe x1 vs Radeon R9 280X
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 347 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 5.43 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 4.19 | no data |
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 (2011−2020) | TeraScale 2 (2009−2015) |
| GPU code name | Tahiti | Cedar |
| Market segment | Desktop | Workstation |
| Design | reference | no data |
| Release date | 8 October 2013 (11 years ago) | 31 January 2011 (13 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $299 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
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 | 2048 | 80 |
| Core clock speed | no data | 600 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1000 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | 4,313 million | 292 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 250 Watt | 15 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 128.0 | 4.800 |
| Floating-point processing power | 4.096 TFLOPS | 0.096 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 32 | 4 |
| TMUs | 128 | 8 |
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 2.0 x1 |
| Length | 275 mm | 170 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 | GDDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 3 GB | 512 MB |
| Memory bus width | 384 Bit | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | no data | 600 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 288 GB/s | 9.6 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, 1x DisplayPort | 1x DMS-59 |
| 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 | + | no data |
API compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | DirectX® 12 | 11.2 (11_0) |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 5.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.4 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | + | N/A |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 8 October 2013 | 31 January 2011 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 3 GB | 512 MB |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 250 Watt | 15 Watt |
R9 280X has an age advantage of 2 years, a 500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.
2270 PCIe x1, on the other hand, has 1566.7% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Radeon R9 280X and FirePro 2270 PCIe x1. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that Radeon R9 280X is a desktop card while FirePro 2270 PCIe x1 is a workstation one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Comparisons with similar GPUs
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
