Quadro P400 vs Radeon R9 280X

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 280X with Quadro P400, including specs and performance data.

R9 280X
2013
3 GB GDDR5, 250 Watt
15.10
+254%

R9 280X outperforms P400 by a whopping 254% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking359688
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation5.572.40
Power efficiency4.179.80
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code nameTahitiGP107
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Designreferenceno data
Release date8 October 2013 (11 years ago)7 February 2017 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$299 $119.99

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

R9 280X has 132% better value for money than Quadro P400.

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 cores2048256
Core clock speedno data1228 MHz
Boost clock speed1000 MHz1252 MHz
Number of transistors4,313 million3,300 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Watt30 Watt
Texture fill rate128.020.03
Floating-point processing power4.096 TFLOPS0.641 TFLOPS
ROPs3216
TMUs12816

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 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length275 mm145 mm
Width2-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectors1 x 6-pin + 1 x 8-pinNone

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 GB2 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speedno data1002 MHz
Memory bandwidth288 GB/s32.06 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 DisplayPort3x mini-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+no data

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212 (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.4
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan+1.2.131
CUDA-6.1

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.

R9 280X 15.10
+254%
Quadro P400 4.26

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 280X 5837
+254%
Quadro P400 1648

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 HD65
+261%
18−20
−261%
4K31
+288%
8−9
−288%

Cost per frame, $

1080p4.60
+44.9%
6.67
−44.9%
4K9.65
+55.5%
15.00
−55.5%
  • R9 280X has 45% lower cost per frame in 1080p
  • R9 280X has 56% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 35−40
+260%
10−11
−260%
Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+271%
7−8
−271%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−33
+275%
8−9
−275%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 35−40
+260%
10−11
−260%
Battlefield 5 60−65
+281%
16−18
−281%
Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+271%
7−8
−271%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−33
+275%
8−9
−275%
Far Cry 5 45−50
+308%
12−14
−308%
Fortnite 158
+295%
40−45
−295%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+275%
16−18
−275%
Forza Horizon 5 35−40
+290%
10−11
−290%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 50−55
+271%
14−16
−271%
Valorant 110−120
+293%
30−33
−293%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 35−40
+260%
10−11
−260%
Battlefield 5 60−65
+281%
16−18
−281%
Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+271%
7−8
−271%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 190−200
+286%
50−55
−286%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−33
+275%
8−9
−275%
Dota 2 90−95
+279%
24−27
−279%
Far Cry 5 45−50
+308%
12−14
−308%
Fortnite 60
+275%
16−18
−275%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+275%
16−18
−275%
Forza Horizon 5 35−40
+290%
10−11
−290%
Grand Theft Auto V 54
+286%
14−16
−286%
Metro Exodus 30−33
+275%
8−9
−275%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 50−55
+271%
14−16
−271%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 48
+300%
12−14
−300%
Valorant 110−120
+293%
30−33
−293%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 60−65
+281%
16−18
−281%
Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+271%
7−8
−271%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−33
+275%
8−9
−275%
Dota 2 137
+291%
35−40
−291%
Far Cry 5 45−50
+308%
12−14
−308%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+275%
16−18
−275%
Forza Horizon 5 35−40
+290%
10−11
−290%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 29
+263%
8−9
−263%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 20
+300%
5−6
−300%
Valorant 110−120
+293%
30−33
−293%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 48
+300%
12−14
−300%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+325%
4−5
−325%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 100−110
+293%
27−30
−293%
Grand Theft Auto V 21−24
+283%
6−7
−283%
Metro Exodus 16−18
+325%
4−5
−325%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140
+283%
35−40
−283%
Valorant 140−150
+268%
40−45
−268%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 40−45
+300%
10−11
−300%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+333%
3−4
−333%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+288%
8−9
−288%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+289%
9−10
−289%
Forza Horizon 5 24−27
+271%
7−8
−271%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+267%
6−7
−267%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 30−35
+288%
8−9
−288%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 12−14
+300%
3−4
−300%
Counter-Strike 2 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Grand Theft Auto V 24−27
+271%
7−8
−271%
Metro Exodus 10−11
+400%
2−3
−400%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+280%
5−6
−280%
Valorant 75−80
+271%
21−24
−271%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 20−22
+300%
5−6
−300%
Counter-Strike 2 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Dota 2 68
+278%
18−20
−278%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+275%
4−5
−275%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+257%
7−8
−257%
Forza Horizon 5 12−14
+300%
3−4
−300%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+333%
3−4
−333%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 14−16
+367%
3−4
−367%

This is how R9 280X and Quadro P400 compete in popular games:

  • R9 280X is 261% faster in 1080p
  • R9 280X is 288% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 15.10 4.26
Recency 8 October 2013 7 February 2017
Maximum RAM amount 3 GB 2 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 250 Watt 30 Watt

R9 280X has a 254.5% higher aggregate performance score, and a 50% higher maximum VRAM amount.

Quadro P400, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 733.3% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R9 280X is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro P400 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R9 280X is a desktop card while Quadro P400 is a 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 280X
Radeon R9 280X
NVIDIA Quadro P400
Quadro P400

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.


4.1 706 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 495 votes

Rate Quadro P400 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R9 280X or Quadro P400, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.