Radeon R9 280 vs RX Vega 56

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

RX Vega 56
2017
8 GB HBM2, 210 Watt
34.32
+138%

RX Vega 56 outperforms R9 280 by a whopping 138% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking141338
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation26.7510.99
ArchitectureVega (2017−2021)GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)
GPU code nameVegaTahiti
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Designno datareference
Release date14 August 2017 (6 years ago)4 March 2014 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$399 $279
Current price$224 (0.6x MSRP)$91 (0.3x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

RX Vega 56 has 143% better value for money than R9 280.

Detailed specifications

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 cores35841792
Core clock speed1138 MHzno data
Boost clock speed1474 MHz933 MHz
Number of transistors12,500 million4,313 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)210 Watt200 Watt
Texture fill rate329.5104.5
Floating-point performance10,566 gflops3,344 gflops

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 supportno dataPCIe 3.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length267 mm275 mm
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors2x 8-pin1 x 6-pin + 1 x 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 typeHBM2GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount8 GB3 GB
Memory bus width409.6 Bit384 Bit
Memory clock speed800 MHz1250 MHz
Memory bandwidth409.6 GB/s240 GB/s
Shared memory-no data

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 Connectors1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 2x mini-DisplayPort
Eyefinityno data1
HDMI++
DisplayPort supportno data-

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

AppAccelerationno data-
CrossFireno data1
Endurono data-
FreeSyncno data1
HD3Dno data+
LiquidVRno data1
PowerTuneno data-
TressFXno data1
TrueAudiono data+
ZeroCoreno data-
UVDno data+
DDMA audiono data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)DirectX® 12
Shader Model6.45.1
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.01.2
Vulkan1.1.125+
Mantleno data-

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.

RX Vega 56 34.32
+138%
R9 280 14.39

RX Vega 56 outperforms R9 280 by 138% 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%

RX Vega 56 13270
+139%
R9 280 5562

RX Vega 56 outperforms R9 280 by 139% 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%

RX Vega 56 20759
+159%
R9 280 8020

RX Vega 56 outperforms R9 280 by 159% in 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics.

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 HD116
+158%
45−50
−158%
1440p80
+167%
30−35
−167%
4K51
+143%
21−24
−143%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 55−60
+146%
24−27
−146%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 77
+157%
30−33
−157%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 60−65
+150%
24−27
−150%
Battlefield 5 164
+152%
65−70
−152%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 75−80
+153%
30−33
−153%
Cyberpunk 2077 55−60
+146%
24−27
−146%
Far Cry 5 115
+156%
45−50
−156%
Far Cry New Dawn 114
+153%
45−50
−153%
Forza Horizon 4 141
+156%
55−60
−156%
Hitman 3 85−90
+143%
35−40
−143%
Horizon Zero Dawn 120−130
+150%
50−55
−150%
Metro Exodus 144
+140%
60−65
−140%
Red Dead Redemption 2 85−90
+146%
35−40
−146%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 110−120
+153%
45−50
−153%
Watch Dogs: Legion 60−65
+167%
24−27
−167%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 70
+159%
27−30
−159%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 60−65
+150%
24−27
−150%
Battlefield 5 153
+155%
60−65
−155%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 75−80
+153%
30−33
−153%
Cyberpunk 2077 55−60
+146%
24−27
−146%
Far Cry 5 70−75
+147%
30−33
−147%
Far Cry New Dawn 90
+157%
35−40
−157%
Forza Horizon 4 134
+144%
55−60
−144%
Hitman 3 85−90
+143%
35−40
−143%
Horizon Zero Dawn 120−130
+150%
50−55
−150%
Metro Exodus 93
+166%
35−40
−166%
Red Dead Redemption 2 85−90
+146%
35−40
−146%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 43
+139%
18−20
−139%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 124
+148%
50−55
−148%
Watch Dogs: Legion 60−65
+167%
24−27
−167%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 52
+148%
21−24
−148%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 60−65
+150%
24−27
−150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 75−80
+153%
30−33
−153%
Cyberpunk 2077 55−60
+146%
24−27
−146%
Far Cry 5 69
+156%
27−30
−156%
Forza Horizon 4 109
+142%
45−50
−142%
Horizon Zero Dawn 120−130
+150%
50−55
−150%
Metro Exodus 84
+140%
35−40
−140%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 74
+147%
30−33
−147%
Watch Dogs: Legion 60−65
+167%
24−27
−167%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 85−90
+146%
35−40
−146%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 98
+145%
40−45
−145%
Far Cry New Dawn 84
+140%
35−40
−140%
Hitman 3 45−50
+156%
18−20
−156%
Red Dead Redemption 2 27−30
+170%
10−11
−170%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 44
+144%
18−20
−144%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 35−40
+164%
14−16
−164%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 50−55
+143%
21−24
−143%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+160%
10−11
−160%
Far Cry 5 74
+147%
30−33
−147%
Forza Horizon 4 88
+151%
35−40
−151%
Horizon Zero Dawn 70−75
+143%
30−33
−143%
Metro Exodus 74
+147%
30−33
−147%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 80−85
+170%
30−33
−170%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 45−50
+161%
18−20
−161%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
+142%
12−14
−142%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry 5 55−60
+171%
21−24
−171%
Far Cry New Dawn 46
+156%
18−20
−156%
Hitman 3 27−30
+180%
10−11
−180%
Horizon Zero Dawn 40−45
+163%
16−18
−163%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 31
+158%
12−14
−158%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 44
+144%
18−20
−144%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 27
+170%
10−11
−170%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 21−24
+163%
8−9
−163%
Battlefield 5 55
+162%
21−24
−162%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−35
+158%
12−14
−158%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+175%
4−5
−175%
Forza Horizon 4 59
+146%
24−27
−146%
Horizon Zero Dawn 40−45
+163%
16−18
−163%
Metro Exodus 42
+163%
16−18
−163%
Watch Dogs: Legion 16−18
+143%
7−8
−143%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 30−33
+150%
12−14
−150%

This is how RX Vega 56 and R9 280 compete in popular games:

  • RX Vega 56 is 158% faster in 1080p
  • RX Vega 56 is 167% faster in 1440p
  • RX Vega 56 is 143% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 34.32 14.39
Recency 14 August 2017 4 March 2014
Cost $399 $279
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 3 GB
Chip lithography 14 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 210 Watt 200 Watt

The Radeon RX Vega 56 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R9 280 in performance tests.


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

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 RX Vega 56
Radeon RX Vega 56
AMD Radeon R9 280
Radeon R9 280

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


4.3 695 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega 56 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 377 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.