Radeon R9 280X vs R9 270X
Aggregated performance score
R9 280X outperforms R9 270X by 19% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
General info
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in performance ranking | 364 | 327 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Value for money | 4.48 | 11.93 |
| Architecture | GCN (2011−2017) | GCN (2011−2017) |
| GPU code name | Curacao XT | Thaiti XTL |
| Market segment | Desktop | Desktop |
| Design | reference | reference |
| Release date | 8 October 2013 (10 years ago) | 8 October 2013 (10 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $199 | $299 |
| Current price | $136 (0.7x MSRP) | $11.99 (0x MSRP) |
Value for money
Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
R9 280X has 166% better value for money than R9 270X.
Technical specs
General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 1280 | 2048 |
| Boost clock speed | 1050 MHz | 1000 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 2,800 million | 4,313 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 180 Watt | 250 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 84.00 | 128.0 |
| Floating-point performance | 2,688 gflops | 4,096 gflops |
Size and 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 | PCIe 3.0 |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 275 mm |
| Width | 2-slot | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | 2 x 6-pin | 1 x 6-pin + 1 x 8-pin |
Memory
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 | 4 GB | 3 GB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 384 Bit |
| Memory bandwidth | 179.2 GB/s | 288 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
Video outputs and ports
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 | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort |
| Eyefinity | + | + |
| HDMI | + | + |
| DisplayPort support | + | + |
Technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| AppAcceleration | + | + |
| CrossFire | 1 | 1 |
| Enduro | - | - |
| FreeSync | 1 | 1 |
| HD3D | + | + |
| LiquidVR | 1 | 1 |
| PowerTune | - | - |
| TressFX | 1 | 1 |
| TrueAudio | + | + |
| ZeroCore | - | - |
| UVD | + | + |
| DDMA audio | + | + |
API support
List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | DirectX® 12 | DirectX® 12 |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | + | + |
| Mantle | - | - |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark performance 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 280X outperforms R9 270X by 19% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
Passmark
This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.
Benchmark coverage: 25%
R9 280X outperforms R9 270X by 19% in Passmark.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 14%
R9 280X outperforms R9 270X by 27% in 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics.
Unigine Heaven 4.0
This is an old DirectX 11 benchmark, a newer version of Unigine 3.0 with relatively small differences. It displays a fantasy medieval town sprawling over several flying islands. The benchmark is still sometimes used, despite its significant age, as it was released back in 2013.
Benchmark coverage: 1%
R9 280X outperforms R9 270X by 38% in Unigine Heaven 4.0.
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 | 50−55
−30%
| 65
+30%
|
| 4K | 24−27
−29.2%
| 31
+29.2%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 20−22
−15%
|
21−24
+15%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 27−30
−18.5%
|
30−35
+18.5%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 21−24
−19%
|
24−27
+19%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 40−45
−18.6%
|
50−55
+18.6%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 30−35
−18.2%
|
35−40
+18.2%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 20−22
−15%
|
21−24
+15%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 30−35
−21.9%
|
35−40
+21.9%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 30−35
−20.6%
|
40−45
+20.6%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 45−50
−17.8%
|
50−55
+17.8%
|
| Hitman 3 | 30−35
−20.6%
|
40−45
+20.6%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 24−27
−23.1%
|
30−35
+23.1%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 21−24
−19%
|
24−27
+19%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 27−30
−18.5%
|
30−35
+18.5%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 21−24
−21.7%
|
27−30
+21.7%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 27−30
−18.5%
|
30−35
+18.5%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 21−24
−19%
|
24−27
+19%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 40−45
−18.6%
|
50−55
+18.6%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 30−35
−18.2%
|
35−40
+18.2%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 20−22
−15%
|
21−24
+15%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 30−35
−21.9%
|
35−40
+21.9%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 30−35
−20.6%
|
40−45
+20.6%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 45−50
−17.8%
|
50−55
+17.8%
|
| Hitman 3 | 30−35
−20.6%
|
40−45
+20.6%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 24−27
−23.1%
|
30−35
+23.1%
|
| Metro Exodus | 18−20
−21.1%
|
21−24
+21.1%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 21−24
−19%
|
24−27
+19%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 27−30
−18.5%
|
30−35
+18.5%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 24−27
−84.6%
|
48
+84.6%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 21−24
−21.7%
|
27−30
+21.7%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 27−30
−18.5%
|
30−35
+18.5%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 21−24
−19%
|
24−27
+19%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 40−45
−18.6%
|
50−55
+18.6%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 20−22
−15%
|
21−24
+15%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 30−35
−21.9%
|
35−40
+21.9%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 30−35
−20.6%
|
40−45
+20.6%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 45−50
−17.8%
|
50−55
+17.8%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 24−27
+30%
|
20
−30%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 21−24
−21.7%
|
27−30
+21.7%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 18−20
−22.2%
|
21−24
+22.2%
|
| Hitman 3 | 20−22
−20%
|
24−27
+20%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 18−20
−16.7%
|
21−24
+16.7%
|
| Metro Exodus | 10−12
−27.3%
|
14−16
+27.3%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 9−10
−22.2%
|
10−12
+22.2%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 16−18
−18.8%
|
18−20
+18.8%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 12−14
−23.1%
|
16−18
+23.1%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 9−10
−33.3%
|
12−14
+33.3%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 24−27
−28%
|
30−35
+28%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7
−33.3%
|
8−9
+33.3%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 20−22
−25%
|
24−27
+25%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 21−24
−27.3%
|
27−30
+27.3%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 24−27
−25%
|
30−33
+25%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 12−14
−25%
|
14−16
+25%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 7−8
−28.6%
|
9−10
+28.6%
|
4K
High Preset
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 9−10
−11.1%
|
10−11
+11.1%
|
| Hitman 3 | 12−14
−16.7%
|
14−16
+16.7%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 9−10
−11.1%
|
10−11
+11.1%
|
| Metro Exodus | 6−7
−33.3%
|
8−9
+33.3%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 7−8
−14.3%
|
8−9
+14.3%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 7−8
−28.6%
|
9−10
+28.6%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 10−12
−27.3%
|
14−16
+27.3%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 7−8
−28.6%
|
9−10
+28.6%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 6−7
−16.7%
|
7−8
+16.7%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 12−14
−33.3%
|
16−18
+33.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 10−11
−20%
|
12−14
+20%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 12−14
−15.4%
|
14−16
+15.4%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 16−18
−23.5%
|
21−24
+23.5%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 4−5
−50%
|
6−7
+50%
|
This is how R9 270X and R9 280X compete in popular games:
- R9 280X is 30% faster than R9 270X in 1080p
- R9 280X is 29.2% faster than R9 270X in 4K
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the R9 270X is 30% faster than the R9 280X.
- in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the R9 280X is 84.6% faster than the R9 270X.
All in all, in popular games:
- R9 270X is ahead in 1 test (1%)
- R9 280X is ahead in 66 tests (97%)
- there's a draw in 1 test (1%)
Advantages and disadvantages
| Performance score | 12.63 | 15.07 |
| Cost | $199 | $299 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 3 GB |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 180 Watt | 250 Watt |
The Radeon R9 280X is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R9 270X in performance tests.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Similar GPU comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
