OVERALL

ALTERNATIVES

SPECS

VS AVERAGE

REVIEWS

AMD Radeon R9 280 Review | 118 Data compared

Avg. price:~£220VRAM:3 GBMemory bus width:384 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):200 W

AMD Radeon R9 280 Review: Compare 118 technical specifications and user reviews to see how this product ranks in the Graphics cards category and whether it is worth buying.

AMD Radeon R9 280

4.3/10

▼Worse than 94% of graphics cards

5.8

▼Worse than 94%

4.0

▼Worse than 93%

7.1

▼Worse than 96%

1.9
Gaming
Gaming
1.9/ 10
✕
What it is
Evaluates core hardware and software specifications for gaming performance.
When it matters
When you want to play demanding mobile games, 3D titles, or run graphics-intensive apps smoothly.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
Score components
45.0%
1.2
Floating-point performance
25.0%
1.6
VRAM
20.0%
1.0
Ray tracing cores / units
10.0%
7.6
PCI Express (PCIe) version
4.3
Video editing
Video editing
4.3/ 10
✕
What it is
Evaluates core hardware and software specifications for video editing performance.
When it matters
When evaluating how effectively this graphics-cards meets your specific video editing needs.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
Score components
35.0%
7.0
AV1 encode
30.0%
1.6
VRAM
20.0%
1.2
Floating-point performance
15.0%
7.6
PCI Express (PCIe) version
1.9
1080p
1080p
1.9/ 10
✕
What it is
Evaluates core hardware and software specifications for 1080p performance.
When it matters
When evaluating how effectively this graphics-cards meets your specific 1080p needs.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
Score components
55.0%
1.2
Floating-point performance
25.0%
1.6
VRAM
10.0%
1.0
Ray tracing cores / units
10.0%
7.6
PCI Express (PCIe) version
1.6
1440p
1440p
1.6/ 10
✕
What it is
Evaluates core hardware and software specifications for 1440p performance.
When it matters
When evaluating how effectively this graphics-cards meets your specific 1440p needs.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
Score components
50.0%
1.2
Floating-point performance
30.0%
1.6
VRAM
15.0%
1.0
Ray tracing cores / units
5.0%
7.6
PCI Express (PCIe) version
1.6
4K
4K
1.6/ 10
✕
What it is
Evaluates core hardware and software specifications for 4k performance.
When it matters
When evaluating how effectively this graphics-cards meets your specific 4k needs.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
Score components
40.0%
1.2
Floating-point performance
35.0%
1.6
VRAM
20.0%
1.0
Ray tracing cores / units
5.0%
7.6
PCI Express (PCIe) version

Where to buy

Check price

*As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.

Best rankings

Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of graphics card AMD Radeon R9 280

4.3

Show more

Hide

Performance

2.0

Show more

Hide

3DMark Time Spy benchmark score

3DMark Port Royal score

PassMark (G3D) result

PassMark (DirectCompute) result

Floating-point performance

Show more

Memory

3.7

Show more

Hide

VRAM

Memory type

GDDR5

GDDR version

Memory bus width

Maximum memory bandwidth

Show more

Platform & Features

6.1

Show more

Hide

PCI Express (PCIe) version

PCIe lanes

DirectX version

Vulkan version

OpenGL version

Show more

Connectivity & Media

6.3

Show more

Hide

Max displays supported

Max digital resolution

DisplayPort outputs

DisplayPort version

DisplayPort link rates

Show more

Power & Cooling

7.4

Show more

Hide

Thermal Design Power (TDP)

Power consumption while under peak load

Recommended PSU wattage

Board power limit

PCIe power spec

200 W

Show more

Design

8.1

Show more

Hide

Size

275x 109x 36 mm

Length

Height

Slot width

Weight

Show more

AMD Radeon R9 280 vs the average graphics card

Why is AMD Radeon R9 280 better than the average graphics card?

Show more

Hide

128 bit wider memory bus
This graphics card has a wider memory bus than the average graphics card (384 bit vs 256 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 256 bit.
384 bit vs 256 bit
2 more displays supported
This graphics card supports more displays than the average graphics card (6 vs 4). The average graphics card supports 4 displays.
6 vs 4
23.1% lower PSU requirement
This graphics card has a lower PSU requirement than the average graphics card (500 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
500 W vs 650 W
16 mm lower card height
This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (109 mm vs 125 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 125 mm.
109 mm vs 125 mm
0.5 slot/s slimmer design
This graphics card occupies fewer slots than the average graphics card (2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s). The average graphics card occupies 2.5 slot/s.
2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s
4 more GPUs supported
This graphics card supports more GPUs in multi-GPU mode than the average graphics card (4 vs 0). The average graphics card supports 0 GPUs in multi-GPU mode.
4 vs 0
2 more DVI outputs
This graphics card has more DVI outputs than the average graphics card (2 vs 0). The average graphics card has 0 DVI outputs.
2 vs 0
Better FP64 ratio
This graphics card has a better FP64 ratio than the average graphics card (1:4 vs 1:64).
1:4 vs 1:64

2.41x cheaper
AMD Radeon R9 280 is cheaper than the average graphics card (£220 vs £530).
£220 vs £530

Better FP64 ratio
This graphics card has a better FP64 ratio than the average graphics card (1:4 vs 1:64).
1:4 vs 1:64

128 bit wider memory bus
This graphics card has a wider memory bus than the average graphics card (384 bit vs 256 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 256 bit.
384 bit vs 256 bit

4 more GPUs supported
This graphics card supports more GPUs in multi-GPU mode than the average graphics card (4 vs 0). The average graphics card supports 0 GPUs in multi-GPU mode.
4 vs 0
Supports multi-GPU linking
This graphics card supports multi-GPU linking, the average graphics card does not.

2 more displays supported
This graphics card supports more displays than the average graphics card (6 vs 4). The average graphics card supports 4 displays.
6 vs 4
2 more DVI outputs
This graphics card has more DVI outputs than the average graphics card (2 vs 0). The average graphics card has 0 DVI outputs.
2 vs 0

23.1% lower PSU requirement
This graphics card has a lower PSU requirement than the average graphics card (500 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
500 W vs 650 W

16 mm lower card height
This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (109 mm vs 125 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 125 mm.
109 mm vs 125 mm
0.5 slot/s slimmer design
This graphics card occupies fewer slots than the average graphics card (2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s). The average graphics card occupies 2.5 slot/s.
2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s

Why is AMD Radeon R9 280 worse than the average graphics card?

Show more

Hide

62.8% lower boost clock speed
This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (933 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
933 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
9 GB less VRAM
This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (3 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
3 GB vs 12 GB
5.6x larger process node
This graphics card has a higher process node than the average graphics card (28 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a process node of 5 nm.
28 nm vs 5 nm
40 fewer ray tracing cores
This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
0 vs 40
2 fewer fans
This graphics card has fewer fans than the average graphics card (1 vs 3).
1 vs 3
56.9% lower base clock speed
This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (827 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
827 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
No CUDA support
This graphics card does not support CUDA, the average graphics card does.
75.7% lower texture rate
This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (92.6 GTexel/s vs 381.2 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 381.2 GTexel/s.
92.6 GTexel/s vs 381.2 GTexel/s

23.6% worse value for money
AMD Radeon R9 280 has worse value for money than the average graphics card (5.82 vs 7.2).
5.82 vs 7.2
13% lower user score
User score
7.1/ 10
✕
What it is
A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the graphics card.
When it matters
When you want to understand how a graphics card performs in real use and how reliable it is in terms of performance, temperatures, noise, stability, and long-term ownership.
Score distribution
▼▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
AMD Radeon R9 280
the average graphics card
AMD Radeon R9 280 has a lower user score than the average graphics card (7.08 vs 8.000).
7.08 vs 8

62.8% lower boost clock speed
This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (933 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
933 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
40 fewer ray tracing cores
This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
0 vs 40
56.9% lower base clock speed
This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (827 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
827 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
No CUDA support
This graphics card does not support CUDA, the average graphics card does.
75.7% lower texture rate
This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (92.6 GTexel/s vs 381.2 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 381.2 GTexel/s.
92.6 GTexel/s vs 381.2 GTexel/s
83.8% lower pixel rate
This graphics card has a lower pixel rate than the average graphics card (26.5 GPixel/s vs 163.2 GPixel/s). The average graphics card has a pixel rate of 163.2 GPixel/s.
26.46 GPixel/s vs 163.2 GPixel/s
12 fewer compute units
This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (28 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
28 vs 40
72 fewer TMUs
This graphics card has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (112 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
112 vs 184
144 fewer AI cores
This graphics card has fewer AI cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 144). The average graphics card has 144 AI cores.
0 vs 144
32 fewer ROPs
This graphics card has fewer ROPs than the average graphics card (32 vs 64). The average graphics card has 64 ROPs.
32 vs 64
85.2% lower FP32 performance
This graphics card has a lower FP32 performance than the average graphics card (3.3 TFLOPS vs 22.57 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.57 TFLOPS.
3.34 TFLOPS vs 22.57 TFLOPS
75.6% lower PassMark score
This graphics card has a lower PassMark score than the average graphics card (5,532 points vs 22,653 points). The average graphics card has a PassMark score of 22,653 points.
5,532 points vs 22,653 points
85.1% lower gaming score
This graphics card has a lower gaming score than the average graphics card (2,180 points vs 14,678.5 points). The average graphics card has a gaming score of 14,678.5 points.
2,180 points vs 14,678.5 points
77.2% lower compute score
This graphics card has a lower compute score than the average graphics card (2,754 points vs 12,074 points). The average graphics card has a compute score of 12,074 points.
2,754 points vs 12,074 points
88.8% lower FP16 performance
This graphics card has a lower FP16 performance than the average graphics card (3.3 TFLOPS vs 29.7 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP16 performance of 29.725 TFLOPS.
3.34 TFLOPS vs 29.725 TFLOPS
85.5% lower compute throughput
This graphics card has a lower compute throughput than the average graphics card (3.3 TFLOPS vs 22.98 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has compute throughput of 22.98 TFLOPS.
3.34 TFLOPS vs 22.98 TFLOPS
2,560 fewer FP32 units
This graphics card has fewer FP32 units than the average graphics card (1,792 vs 4,352). The average graphics card has 4,352 FP32 units.
1,792 vs 4,352

9 GB less VRAM
This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (3 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
3 GB vs 12 GB
73.7% slower memory speed
This graphics card has a lower effective memory speed than the average graphics card (5,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz). The average graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 19,000 MHz.
5,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz
46.4% lower memory bandwidth
This graphics card has a lower memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (240 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
240 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
28.6% slower VRAM clock
This graphics card has a lower VRAM clock than the average graphics card (1,250 MHz vs 1,750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1,750 MHz.
1,250 MHz vs 1,750 MHz
87.5% smaller L1 cache
This graphics card has fewer L1 cache than the average graphics card (16 vs 128). The average graphics card has 128 L1 cache.
16 vs 128

5.6x larger process node
This graphics card has a higher process node than the average graphics card (28 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a process node of 5 nm.
28 nm vs 5 nm
No DLSS support
This graphics card does not support DLSS, the average graphics card does.
No ray tracing
This graphics card does not support ray tracing, the average graphics card does.
9 older
This graphics card was released earlier than the average graphics card (2014 vs 2023).
March 2014
2,014 vs 2,023
Older PCIe version
This graphics card supports an older PCIe version than the average graphics card (3 vs 4).
3.0 vs 4.0
No AI upscalers
This graphics card does not support AI upscalers, the average graphics card does.
Older encoder generation
This graphics card uses an older encoder generation than the average graphics card (1 vs 8). The average graphics card uses encoder generation 8.
1 vs 8
No mesh shaders
This graphics card does not support mesh shaders, the average graphics card does.
No XeSS support
This graphics card does not support XeSS, the average graphics card does.
No DirectStorage support
This graphics card does not support DirectStorage, the average graphics card does.
Older Vulkan version
This graphics card supports an older Vulkan version than the average graphics card (1.2 vs 1.4).
1.2 vs 1.4
Worse SAM support
This graphics card offers worse SAM support than the average graphics card (no vs yes).
Older DirectX version
This graphics card supports an older DirectX version than the average graphics card (11.1 vs 12 Ultimate).
11.1 vs 12 Ultimate
Older OpenCL version
This graphics card supports an older OpenCL version than the average graphics card (1.2 vs 3).
1.2 vs 3.0
Older shader model
This graphics card supports an older shader model than the average graphics card (6.5 vs 6.8).
6.5 vs 6.8
No sampler feedback
This graphics card does not support sampler feedback, the average graphics card does.
No vs yes
Older OpenGL version
This graphics card supports an older OpenGL version than the average graphics card (4.4 vs 4.6).
4.4 vs 4.6
81.2% fewer transistors
This graphics card has fewer transistors than the average graphics card (4,313 million vs 22,900 million). The average graphics card has 22,900 million transistors.
4,313 million vs 22,900 million

2 fewer DisplayPort outputs
This graphics card has fewer DisplayPort outputs than the average graphics card (1 vs 3). The average graphics card has 3 DisplayPort outputs.
1 vs 3
No AV1 encoding
This graphics card does not support AV1 encoding, the average graphics card does.
No vs yes
No AV1 decoding
This graphics card does not support AV1 decoding, the average graphics card does.
No vs yes
No DSC support
This graphics card does not support DSC, the average graphics card does.
No vs yes
Older HDMI version
This graphics card supports an older HDMI version than the average graphics card (1.4a vs 2.1).
1.4a vs 2.1
No VRR support
This graphics card does not support VRR, the average graphics card does.
No vs yes
Older DisplayPort version
This graphics card supports an older DisplayPort version than the average graphics card (1.2 vs 1.4a).
1.2 vs 1.4a
Narrower encode codec support
This graphics card supports narrower hardware encode codec support than the average graphics card (H.264 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9).
H.264 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9
Narrower decode codec support
This graphics card supports narrower hardware decode codec support than the average graphics card (H.264/MPEG-2/VC-1 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9/MPEG-2/VC-1).
H.264/MPEG-2/VC-1 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9/MPEG-2/VC-1
Older HDCP version
This graphics card supports an older HDCP version than the average graphics card (1.4 vs 2.3).
1.4 vs 2.3
Lower display resolution
This graphics card supports a lower maximum digital resolution than the average graphics card (4096x2160 vs 7680x4320). The average graphics card supports a maximum digital resolution of 7680x4320.
4096x2160 vs 7680x4320
2 fewer monitors per output type
This graphics card supports fewer monitors per output type than the average graphics card (1 vs 3). The average graphics card supports 3 monitors per output type.
1 vs 3
73% lower DisplayPort bandwidth
This graphics card has a lower DisplayPort bandwidth than the average graphics card (5.4 Gbps vs 20 Gbps). The average graphics card has DisplayPort bandwidth of 20 Gbps.
5.4 Gbps vs 20 Gbps

2 fewer fans
This graphics card has fewer fans than the average graphics card (1 vs 3).
1 vs 3
No fan stop
This graphics card does not support fan stop, the average graphics card does.
No vs yes
39 dB noisier at idle
This graphics card has a higher idle noise level than the average graphics card (39 dB vs 0 dB). The average graphics card has an idle noise level of 0 dB.
39 dB vs 0 dB
3.6 dB noisier under load
This graphics card has a higher load noise level than the average graphics card (39 dB vs 35.4 dB). The average graphics card has a load noise level of 35.4 dB.
39 dB vs 35.4 dB

No backplate
This graphics card does not include a backplate, the average graphics card does.
No vs yes
No RGB lighting
This graphics card does not include RGB lighting, the average graphics card does.

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

2.0

BogusDanger

✓ explicit

30/12/2025

Hands-on review · game tests after cleaning and repasting

Verdict

AMD Radeon R9 280 is playable in many modern games at low settings, a solid result for a used card.

5.0

Older Tech Today

≈ estimated

21/12/2024

Hands-on test · older GPU in 2024 game benchmarks

Verdict

AMD Radeon R9 280 still runs most games, but its power use and driver support make it hard to recommend.

5.0

Older Tech Today

≈ estimated

04/11/2023

Hands-on test · esports and older game benchmarks

Verdict

AMD Radeon R9 280 is fine for esports at 1080p low, but driver support and DirectX 12 limits make it hard to recommend.

Overview video

Not graded

Overview video

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

pcmag.com

04/06/2014

Asus Radeon R9 280 Direct CU II Review - PCMag

Lab test · Quiet 1080p card

Verdict

The Asus Radeon R9 280 Direct CU II is nearly silent and strong at 1080p, but it blows hot air into your case.

bit-tech.net

19/05/2014

Summary of the review

AMD Radeon R9 280 Review feat. XFX | bit-tech.net

The bit-tech review of the AMD Radeon R9 280 XFX Double Dissipation Edition evaluates the card as a mid-range contender that serves as a rebadged version of the older HD 7950 Boost. Built on the 28nm "Tahiti Pro2" architecture, it features 1,792 stream processors, 32 ROPs, and 3GB of GDDR5 memory on a wide 384-bit bus. The pros highlighted in the review include its aggressive pricing—making it the least expensive R9 280 on the market at launch at £175 / $270—and a sleek, understated custom shroud with chrome accents. Performance-wise, the custom Double Dissipation dual-fan cooler achieves a phenomenal delta temperature of 38°C while remaining exceptionally quiet, never exceeding 46% fan speed under full load. Furthermore, the card exhibits massive overclocking potential, stable at 1,080MHz core (a 16% increase) and 1.575GHz memory (a 26% increase), allowing it to successfully match or exceed the performance of the more expensive stock R9 280X while drawing less power. However, the hardware also carries several notable cons and design limitations. Architecturally, it is a recycled, older GPU design with minimal stock upgrades, pushing a...

techporn.ph

04/06/2014

Summary of the review

SAPPHIRE Radeon R9 280 DUAL-X OC w/ Boost Review - TechPorn

The SAPPHIRE Radeon R9 280 DUAL-X OC is a factory-overclocked graphics card featuring 3GB of GDDR5 VRAM, a 384-bit memory bandwidth, and a core clock speed that boosts from 870MHz up to 940MHz. Built as a reincarnation of the older HD 7950, it targets Full HD (1080p) gaming at maximum settings, while showing commendable capabilities in GPU Compute tasks and entry-level 1440p gaming if demanding settings like anti-aliasing are turned down. The card features a classy black and silver shroud with dual-cooling fans, multi-display support via AMD Eyefinity, and dual 6-pin power connectors. A major pro of this graphics card is its exceptional thermal design, keeping full-load temperatures strictly under 70°C without generating disruptive noise. It also features impressive overclocking headroom, safely reaching a stable 1100MHz core clock that translates to a 12% boost in synthetic benchmarks. Additionally, SAPPHIRE packages the card generously, offering unique accessories like a full 1.8-meter HDMI cable. On the downside, the physical build lacks a back-plate or side-plate for structural rigidity, leaving the blue PCB entirely bare. Power consumption also presents a mixed bag, and...

guru3d.com

03/07/2014

HIS Radeon R9-280 IceQ X2 OC review

Hands-on test · Custom IceQ cooler

Verdict

The HIS Radeon R9-280 IceQ X2 Turbo is a cool, quiet, factory-overclocked card with 3GB of memory, suited to Full HD gaming.

uk.pcmag.com

04/06/2014

Asus Radeon R9 280 Direct CU II Review - PCMag UK

Review · Quiet 1080p card

Verdict

The Asus Radeon R9 280 Direct CU II is a near-silent 1080p gaming card whose cooler vents heat into the case, which can warm a room.

forbes.com

17/03/2014

Summary of the review

First Impressions Of MSI's Radeon R9 280 Twin Frozr IV Graphics Card

Jason Evangelho’s Forbes review highlights the MSI Radeon R9 280 Twin Frozr IV as an enhanced, rebranded AMD Radeon 7950 designed to counter severe cryptocurrency-driven market scarcity. Key advantages of this specific MSI iteration include factory overclocked core speeds of 1000MHz, an efficient Twin Frozr IV cooling system, and, crucially, stable pricing near the $279 MSRP, unlike recent, inflated GPU launches. Despite the positive hardware, the review notes potential disadvantages regarding the overall market, as similar, newer cards like the Radeon R7 265 quickly experienced 23% price hikes due to demand. While the card offers strong, cost-effective performance, its long-term value is at risk from the erratic supply chain issues caused by crypto-mining.

hardwareluxx.de

16/07/2014

Summary of the review

Five Radeon R9 280 Models Reviewed - Hardwareluxx

This 2014 review from Hardwareluxx evaluates five custom models of the AMD Radeon R9 280 graphics card: the ASUS DirectCU II Top, HIS IceQ OC, HIS IceQ X2 OC, PowerColor TurboDuo OC, and Sapphire Dual-X OC. Priced in the sub-200 Euro sweet spot at the time, the Radeon R9 280 is highlighted as a rebranded and slightly optimized version of the older "Tahiti PRO" architecture originally seen in the Radeon HD 7950. It features 1,792 shader units, 3 GB of GDDR5 memory on a wide 384-bit interface, and a 250W TDP. The review examines how each manufacturer tweaks the base reference design to stand out, primarily focusing on variations in factory boost clocks (ranging from 940 MHz up to 980 MHz) and the implementation of proprietary cooling solutions. A major pro identified in the review is the card's strong value proposition in the mid-range market, offering reliable performance for budget-conscious buyers. The custom cooling designs from the various brands are also a significant benefit, as they aim to provide quieter operation and lower temperatures compared to AMD's reference design. On...

ocinside.de

20/08/2014

Summary of the review

Sapphire Radeon R9 280 Dual-X OC Review

The review from ⁠OCinside.de evaluates the Sapphire Radeon R9 280 Dual-X OC 3GB, positioning it as a highly cost-effective, mid-class all-round graphics card. While newer R9 380 models were launching at the time, this card stood out for its excellent price-to-performance ratio, costing roughly €190. In terms of performance pros, the card delivers robust 1080p gaming capabilities and behaves very well under overclocking, easily reaching up to 1100 MHz core and 1600 MHz memory frequencies. Furthermore, its Dual-X multi-heatpipe twin-fan cooling solution proves to be highly reliable, keeping maximum load temperatures safely at approximately 71°C while remaining impressively quiet during regular use. On the downside, its power consumption serves as a notable con, spiking from an efficient 56.9 Watts at idle up to 317.4 Watts for the total system under full load, which further climbs to 364.2 Watts when overclocked. Additionally, while it provides excellent value for mid-range systems, its raw power predictably lags behind high-end options; benchmarks show it only delivers about half the performance of premium setups like the MSI GeForce GTX 780 Ti OC. Overall, the review...

hardware-mag.de

08/06/2014

Summary of the review

Sapphire Radeon R9 280 Dual-X OC Review

The Hardware-Magazin review evaluates the Sapphire Radeon R9 280 Dual-X OC, a factory-overclocked graphics card designed to target the mid-range market and compete directly against Nvidia's GeForce GTX 760. Built on a refreshed "Tahiti" GPU architecture derived from the older Radeon HD 7950, this specific Sapphire iteration features an enhanced out-of-the-box core clock and swaps AMD's standard reference design for a custom Dual-X dual-fan cooling system. The review puts the graphics card through an extensive benchmarking suite—including demanding titles like Crysis Warhead, Far Cry 2, and S.T.A.L.K.E.R. Call of Pripyat, alongside synthetic tests like 3DMark 11 and Unigine Heaven—to thoroughly analyze its raw 3D gaming performance, power draw, temperature, and acoustic profile. The evaluation reveals distinct advantages and drawbacks for Sapphire’s custom hardware. On the positive side (pros), the custom Dual-X cooler performs exceptionally well, delivering highly efficient heat dissipation that keeps the GPU running cool while maintaining significantly lower noise levels than the noisy stock reference design. Additionally, the factory overclocking provides a measurable performance boost over reference models, enabling robust 1080p gaming capabilities. However, on the negative side...

download.gamestar.de

01/07/2014

Summary of the review

AMD Radeon R9 280 Review - GameStar

The AMD Radeon R9 280 (specifically tested as the MSI Gaming edition) is a repurposed version of the older Southern Island architecture, mirroring the technical blueprint of the popular Radeon HD 7950 Boost. Priced around 200 Euros, this mid-range card bridges the gap between the R9 270X and R9 280X to directly target Nvidia's GeForce GTX 760. Powered by a slightly scaled-down Tahiti Pro chip operating at up to 933 MHz (972 MHz for MSI's factory overclock) and utilizing a 384-bit memory interface with 3.0 GB of GDDR5 VRAM, it delivers exceptional performance per Euro. Testing shows it handles modern games smoothly at 1080p resolution with maximum details and outperforms the GTX 760 by roughly 21 percent overall. It even beats the older Nvidia flagship GTX 680 in demanding scenarios. Pros & Cons Pros: The card offers a brilliant price-to-performance ratio and features an incredibly efficient and quiet MSI TwinFrozr cooling system that runs at an inaudible 0.2 Sone during idle and just 1.9 Sone under full load. It provides plenty of video memory (3.0 GB) and maintains comfortable load...

ocinside.de

01/10/2014

MSI Twin Frozr Gaming Radeon R9 280 OC Graphics Card Review - OCinside.de

Benchmark test · Factory-overclocked GPU

Verdict

The MSI Twin Frozr Gaming Radeon R9 280 OC stays quiet under load, peaking at 75°C, but its factory overclock adds little speed.

ocinside.de

15/08/2014

Summary of the review

Sapphire Radeon R9 280 Dual-X OC Review - OCinside.de

The Sapphire Radeon R9 280 Dual-X OC features a black circuit board equipped with a dual-slot "Dual-X Cooling" system that relies on two 100mm fans and a dedicated copper heatpipe setup to cool the GPU, memory chips, and voltage regulators. For power, it requires two 6-pin connectors from a recommended minimum 500-watt power supply unit, with real-world system testing reaching a maximum draw of 364.2 watts when paired with an AMD APU. A standout feature is the physical Sapphire Dual BIOS button located near the CrossFire contacts. This switch allows users to easily alternate between a highly compatible Legacy BIOS and a fast-booting UEFI BIOS that reduces PC startup and hibernation wake times. For connectivity, the card offers four display outputs on its bracket: one HDMI 1.4a, one DisplayPort 1.2, and a Dual-Link DVI port capable of running high-resolution monitors.

lesnumeriques.com

17/10/2014

AMD Radeon R9 280 Review: The Hidden Radeon HD 7950

Lab test · Rebadged HD 7950

Verdict

The Radeon R9 280 is a rebadged HD 7950 Boost that still handles 1080p games well but offers nothing new.

hardware.fr

02/09/2014

Summary of the review

AMD Radeon R9 285 review: Tonga, the Sapphire Dual-X OC, and the R9 280 tested

The Hardware.fr review evaluates the AMD Radeon R9 285, a mid-range graphics card priced between €200 and €250 designed to phase out the older Tahiti-based Radeon R9 280. The card introduces the 5-billion transistor "Tonga" GPU, which transitions AMD's Graphics Core Next architecture to version GCN 1.2. The core objective of this release is not to deliver raw performance leaps or price cuts, but to modernize AMD's mainstream lineup by backporting the advanced technological features of higher-end Bonaire and Hawaii GPUs. The comprehensive evaluation features a series of gaming benchmarks—including Battlefield 4, Crysis 3, and Metro Last Light—alongside a detailed look at custom partner models from the Sapphire Dual-X OC and XFX Black Edition lineups. The primary pros of the Radeon R9 285 center on its feature set upgrades, which bring full compatibility for FreeSync variable refresh rates, the TrueAudio accelerator, and CrossFire XDMA multi-GPU configurations without physical bridge cables. It also boasts a boosted, modernized video playback engine and optimized Direct3D 11.2 Tiled Resources support. Conversely, the explicit cons outlined by the reviewer are that the card fails to...

tomshardware.fr

22/01/2015

Summary of the review

GeForce GTX 960: A mid-range revolution? (Comparison including the R9 280)

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 introduces the Maxwell architecture to the mid-range market as a replacement for the older Kepler-based GTX 760, launching at an aggressive promotional price of €199 (standard price €219). Built on the compact 28nm GM206 GPU, its design essentially cuts a GTX 980 in half, featuring 1,024 CUDA cores and 2 Go of GDDR5 memory. While its narrow 128-bit memory bus slashes raw bandwidth to 112.2 GB/s, NVIDIA compensates for this bottleneck in 1080p gaming using a third-generation color compression engine and Multi-Frame Sampled Anti-Aliasing (MFAA). Factory-overclocked partner variants, like the tested Asus Strix, consistently deliver smooth 1080p performance that edges past the AMD Radeon R9 285 by about 5%, though both cards hit a performance wall and trigger heavy stuttering when pushed to 4K resolutions. Key Pros & Cons Pros: Exceptionally low power consumption with a 120W TDP that requires only a single 6-pin power connector. Highly attractive launch pricing alongside affordable factory-overclocked partner models. Excellent multimedia and software features, including native H.265 (HEVC) 4K video decoding, ShadowPlay game recording, and performance-saving MFAA antialiasing. Cons:...

hardwarecooking.fr

17/07/2021

Summary of the review

Red Dead Redemption 2 DLSS Performance Test: R9 280 Benchmark at Minimum Specs

This review tests the performance impact of NVIDIA DLSS technology on Red Dead Redemption II using 13 different graphics cards from both NVIDIA (Ampere and Turing architectures) and AMD Radeon. The benchmark test bench features a high-end setup, including an AMD Ryzen 9 5900X processor, an ASUS ROG Strix B550-E GAMING motherboard, and 32 GB of DDR4 RAM running at 3600 MHz. All tests are specifically evaluated with the game's graphics settings pushed to their absolute maximum Ultra quality preset. For the DLSS benchmarks, the reviewers opted for the "Quality" mode instead of "Performance" mode to ensure they evaluate the game while maintaining the highest possible visual fidelity. A primary benefit (pro) highlighted in the review is the substantial performance uplift provided by NVIDIA's Tensor Cores, with NVIDIA claiming gains up to 45% in 4K resolution. For example, data shows a GeForce RTX 3080 Ti jumping from a native 58.9 average FPS to 89.3 FPS when DLSS is enabled. However, the review also notes a notable drawback (con) raised by users in the community, who point out that the DLSS...

elchapuzasinformatico.com

18/11/2014

Summary of the review

Review: Gigabyte Radeon R9 280 OC - El Chapuzas Informático

The Gigabyte Radeon R9 280 OC features the WindForce 3X cooling system, designed to enhance airflow efficiency and reduce noise through specialized fan blades, measuring 285 x 126 x 38 mm. It offers extensive connectivity with one DVI-I, one HDMI, and two mini-DisplayPort connections, supporting up to four simultaneous monitors. Pros include high-performance cooling and multi-display support, while the significant physical length is a disadvantage for compact cases.

elchapuzasinformatico.com

18 de noviembre de 2014

Summary of the review

Review: Gigabyte Radeon R9 280 OC - El Chapuzas Informático

The El Chapuzas Informático review of the Gigabyte Radeon R9 280 OC highlights a heavily customized card featuring the WindForce 3X cooling system, which delivers excellent thermal performance and a significant factory overclock to 1072 MHz boost. Key advantages include superior cooling stability via three fans and copper heat pipes, along with dual BIOS functionality. However, the card’s 296 mm length poses compatibility issues for smaller cases, and the high-performance cooling results in considerable fan noise under load. Additionally, the card requires a 550W+ power supply due to its 200W-250W TDP, while the 3GB GDDR5 memory operates at stock, non-overclocked speeds.

elchapuzasinformatico.com

16/09/2014

Summary of the review

Review: Sapphire R9 285 Dual-X OC vs MSI R9 280 Gaming

The review on El Chapuzas Informático awards both the Sapphire R9 285 Dual-X OC and the MSI R9 280 Gaming the Gold Award, concluding the older R9 280 is a better value due to a €50 price premium on the newer model. The Sapphire R9 285 brings lower power consumption, smaller size, and newer technologies (FreeSync, TrueAudio) as pros, but suffers from a limited 2GB VRAM, 256-bit bus, and higher cost. Conversely, the MSI R9 280 Gaming offers a 3GB VRAM, wider 384-bit bus, and superior price-to-performance ratio, while its cons include higher power consumption and lack of newer feature support. The review recommends the MSI R9 280 for better frames-per-euro, as the R9 285's performance gains do not justify the price difference.

nexthardware.com

19/05/2014

Summary of the review

SAPPHIRE Radeon R9 280 OC Dual-X | Review

The Sapphire Radeon R9 280 OC Dual-X offers strong 1080p performance via its factory overclock (940 MHz boost) and 3GB GDDR5 memory, providing excellent value for a mid-range card. Its Dual-X cooling system ensures efficient, quiet thermal management under load, while the card still offers decent headroom for further manual overclocking. Conversely, the card is a rebranded Radeon HD 7950, resulting in higher power consumption (250W TDP) compared to newer architectures and limited performance at 1440p resolutions. While handling modern titles at 1080p, the aging Tahiti architecture lacks the efficiency of contemporary competitors.

Third-party reviews

Based on ratings from across the web.

Reviews last updated: November 2026 · How we calculate this

What we like about AMD Radeon R9 280

Solid 1080p gaming performance for modern (at the time) titles
Generous 3GB GDDR5 memory provides a good buffer for textures
High value for money, often outperforming competitors like the GTX 760 in benchmarks
Excellent overclocking potential with significant gains in core and memory speeds
Custom cooler designs (like Asus DirectCU II or Sapphire Dual-X) offer near-silent operation under load
Supports multi-display technology for immersive gaming setups

What we don't like about AMD Radeon R9 280

Essentially a rebrand of the older Radeon HD 7950, offering little architectural innovation
High power consumption (250W TDP) compared to Nvidia's mid-range offerings
Large physical dimensions can make it difficult to fit into smaller PC cases
Cooling designs often exhaust hot air directly into the case rather than out the back
Lacks full DirectX 12 support (feature level 11_1 only), causing compatibility issues with newer games
Official driver updates have ceased, requiring modded drivers for modern compatibility

Verdict

The AMD Radeon R9 280, launched in March 2014, is a performance-segment graphics card built on the 28nm process and based on the Tahiti PRO GPU architecture. It features 1,792 stream processors, 112 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs, operating at a base clock of 827 MHz with a boost up to 933 MHz. A primary highlight is its 3GB of GDDR5 memory paired with a high-bandwidth 384-bit memory interface, delivering approximately 240 GB/s of bandwidth. Main pros include solid 1080p gaming performance, effective multi-monitor support, and a competitive price-to-performance ratio for its era. However, common cons include high power consumption with a 200W-250W TDP requiring both 6-pin and 8-pin connectors, limited modern feature support such as DirectX 12 level 11_1 only, and dated thermal efficiency compared to newer architectures.

Best alternatives

Graphics cards

ASRock ARC B570 Challenger OC

Graphics cards

Graphics cards

ASUS Dual Radeon RX 7600 OC Edition

Graphics cards

Intel ARC A770 16GB

Graphics cards

GIGABYTE GeForce RTX 2070 Super Gaming OC

Graphics cards

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2070 Super

Graphics cards

SPARKLE ARC A580 Orc OC Edition

Graphics cards

MSI GeForce RTX 2070 Super Ventus OC

Graphics cards

SPARKLE ARC B570 Guardian OC

Graphics cards

ASRock ARC B580 Challenger OC

Graphics cards

Graphics cards

See best alternatives in Buying Guide

Compare AMD Radeon R9 280 with other products in the Graphics cards category

Graphic comparison of AMD Radeon R9 280 and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found