Quadro RTX 8200 vs Radeon R9 280X
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 405 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 4.89 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 4.29 | no data |
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 (2012−2020) | Ampere (2020−2025) |
| GPU code name | Tahiti | GA102 |
| Market segment | Desktop | Workstation |
| Design | reference | no data |
| Release date | 8 October 2013 (12 years ago) | no data |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $299 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
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 cores | 2048 | 7552 |
| Boost clock speed | 1000 MHz | 1500 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 4,313 million | 40,000 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 250 Watt | 260 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 128.0 | 708.0 |
| Floating-point processing power | 4.096 TFLOPS | 22.66 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 32 | 96 |
| TMUs | 128 | 472 |
| L1 Cache | 512 KB | no data |
| L2 Cache | 768 KB | no data |
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 4.0 x16 |
| Length | 275 mm | 267 mm |
| Width | 2-slot | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1 x 6-pin + 1 x 8-pin | 1x 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 type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 3 GB | 48 GB |
| Memory bus width | 384 Bit | 384 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | no data | 14000 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 288 GB/s | 672.0 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 Connectors | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort | 4x DisplayPort, 1x USB Type-C |
| 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 support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | DirectX® 12 | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | no data |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | no data |
| Vulkan | + | - |
Pros & cons summary
| Maximum RAM amount | 3 GB | 48 GB |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 250 Watt | 260 Watt |
R9 280X has 4% lower power consumption.
RTX 8200, on the other hand, has a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 300% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between Radeon R9 280X and Quadro RTX 8200. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that Radeon R9 280X is a desktop graphics card while Quadro RTX 8200 is a workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
