Scored using Graphics cards Methodology v3.0
Graphics cards Methodology v3.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Graphics cards Methodology v3.0: the technical score from the specifications is the base, and independent expert and video reviews (up to ±0.5 points), owner opinions (up to ±0.3) and best-of lists (up to +0.3) move it up or down.
Explore Graphics cards Methodology v3.0

GIGABYTE Radeon R9 280X WINDFORCE 3X OC Rev 2 review: 117 specs compared

Avg. price:~£260VRAM:3 GBMemory bus width:384 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):250 W

GIGABYTE Radeon R9 280X WINDFORCE 3X OC Rev 2 Review: Compare 117 technical specifications and 2 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Graphics cards category and whether it is worth buying.

GIGABYTE Radeon R9 280X WINDFORCE 3X OC Rev 2
5.4/10

Overall score

Score
5.4/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, expert reviews, best-of lists and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 40%, Reviews score 25%, List score 25%, Sentiment score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
Score components

40%

4.2

Technical score

25%

4.2

Reviews score

25%

?

List scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.5, the mark of a weaker model in this category

10%

?

Sentiment scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.8, the mark of a weaker model in this category

â–¼Worse than 94% of graphics cards
6.5

Value for money

Value for money
6.5/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
Score components

70%

5.4

Overall score

30%

9.2

Price

â–¼Worse than 86%
4.2

Technical score

Technical score
4.2/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
Score components

44%

2.2

Performance

24%

3.6

Memory

12%

8.5

Power

11%

6.3

Features

5%

7.2

Design

4%

6.2

Connectivity

â–¼Worse than 92%
4.2

Reviews score

Reviews score
4.2/ 10
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10

4.2

Mark 7.7 is below the typical mark 7.9 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

80%

7.9

Average grade

20%

6.5

Popularity

Grades by review (2)
1 review, its grade estimated from the review text. 1 video review, counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
â–¼Worse than 94%
?

List score

List score
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
How we count it
Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
Lists with this model (0)
Not in any best-of list yet, so this part counts as 7.5. Models in a list get 8 to 10.
Not in any best-of list yet
  • gigabyte-r9-280x-windforce-3x-oc-rev-2
  • gigabyte-r9-280x-windforce-3x-oc-rev-2
  • gigabyte-r9-280x-windforce-3x-oc-rev-2
  • gigabyte-r9-280x-windforce-3x-oc-rev-2
gigabyte-r9-280x-windforce-3x-oc-rev-2
gigabyte-r9-280x-windforce-3x-oc-rev-2
gigabyte-r9-280x-windforce-3x-oc-rev-2
gigabyte-r9-280x-windforce-3x-oc-rev-2
Where to buy
    N/A~ £260
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.
Loading...
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of graphics card GIGABYTE Radeon R9 280X WINDFORCE 3X OC Rev 2

Technical score
Technical score
4.2/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
Score components:

44%

2.2

Performance

24%

3.6

Memory

12%

8.5

Power

11%

6.3

Features

5%

7.2

Design

4%

6.2

Connectivity

4.2
Reviews score
4.2
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
6.5/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
Score components:

70%

5.4

Overall score

30%

9.2

Price

6.5
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
2,754 points
This graphics card scores 2,754 points in 3DMark Time Spy, which is lower than 93.3% of graphics cards.
3DMark Port Royal score
0 points
This graphics card scores 0 points in 3DMark Port Royal, which is lower than 83.1% of graphics cards and equal to 16.9% of graphics cards.
PassMark (G3D) result
5,118 points
This graphics card scores 5,118 points in PassMark G3D, which is lower than 93.2% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
2,843 points
This graphics card scores 2,843 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is lower than 91.6% of graphics cards.
FP32 performance
4.51 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 4.51 TFLOPS FP32 performance, which is lower than that of 88.3% of graphics cards.
Show more
VRAM
3 GB
This graphics card has 3 GB of VRAM, which is less than 93.7% of graphics cards and equal to 0.5% of graphics cards.
Memory type
GDDR6
This graphics card uses GDDR6 memory, which is newer than on 16.4% of graphics cards and equal to 40.3% of graphics cards.
Memory bus width
384 bit
This graphics card uses a 384 bit memory bus, which is wider than that of 89.7% of graphics cards and equal to that of 7% of graphics cards.
Maximum memory bandwidth
288 GB/s
This graphics card reaches 288 GB/s memory bandwidth, which is lower than that of 69.9% of graphics cards and equal to that of 6.5% of graphics cards.
Effective memory speed
6,000 MHz
This graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 6,000 MHz, which is slower than that of 94.6% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.4% of graphics cards.
Show more
PCI Express (PCIe) version
3
This graphics card supports PCIe 3, which is older than on 77.6% of graphics cards and equal to 20.1% of graphics cards.
PCIe lanes
x16
This graphics card uses x16 PCIe lanes, which is more than 24.1% of graphics cards and equal to 75.9% of graphics cards.
DirectX version
12
This graphics card supports DirectX 12, which is older than on 81.8% of graphics cards and equal to 17% of graphics cards.
Vulkan version
1.2
This graphics card supports Vulkan 1.2, which is older than on 94.9% of graphics cards and equal to 3.9% of graphics cards.
OpenGL version
4.6
This graphics card supports OpenGL 4.6, which is more advanced than on 2% of graphics cards and equal to 98% of graphics cards.
Show more
Max displays supported
4
This graphics card supports up to 4 displays, which is more than 9% of graphics cards and equal to 88.2% of graphics cards.
Max digital resolution
4096x2160
This graphics card supports a maximum digital resolution of 4096x2160, which is lower than that of 92.4% of graphics cards and equal to that of 4.6% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort outputs
1
This graphics card offers 1 DisplayPort outputs, which is fewer than 88.1% of graphics cards and equal to 8.7% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort version
1.2
This graphics card supports DisplayPort 1.2, which is older than on 93.9% of graphics cards and equal to 5.1% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort link rates
17.28 Gbps
This graphics card supports DisplayPort link rates up to 17.28 Gbps, which is slower than on 57.7% of graphics cards and equal to 1.1% of graphics cards.
Show more
Thermal Design Power (TDP)
250 W
This graphics card has a TDP of 250 W, which is higher than that of 59.1% of graphics cards and equal to that of 6.3% of graphics cards.
Power consumption while under peak load
250 W
This graphics card draws 250 W under peak load, which is higher than 57.6% of graphics cards and equal to 4.8% of graphics cards.
Recommended PSU wattage
600 W
This graphics card recommends a 600 W PSU, which is lower than that of 53.2% of graphics cards and equal to that of 8.6% of graphics cards.
Board power limit
250 W
This graphics card has a board power limit of 250 W, which is higher than that of 56% of graphics cards and equal to that of 4.5% of graphics cards.
PCIe power spec
250 W
Show more
Size
285x 126x 38 mm
Length
285 mm
This graphics card is 285 mm long, which is longer than 50.3% of graphics cards and equal in length to 0.5% of graphics cards.
Height
127 mm
This graphics card is 127 mm tall, which is taller than 54.2% of graphics cards and equal in height to 1.2% of graphics cards.
Slot width
2 slot/s
This graphics card occupies 2 slot/s, which is slimmer than 52.4% of graphics cards and equal in width to 43.4% of graphics cards.
Weight
?
Show more

GIGABYTE Radeon R9 280X WINDFORCE 3X OC Rev 2 vs the average graphics card

246810TotalPerformanceMemoryFeaturesConnectivityPowerDesign
  • 192 bit wider memory bus
    This graphics card has a wider memory bus than the average graphics card (384 bit vs 192 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 192 bit.
    384 bit vs 192 bit
  • 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
  • 1 more DVI outputs
    This graphics card has more DVI outputs than the average graphics card (1 vs 0). The average graphics card has 0 DVI outputs.
    1 vs 0
  • Supports NVLink
    This graphics card supports NVLink, the average graphics card does not.
  • Supports multi-GPU linking
    This graphics card supports multi-GPU linking, the average graphics card does not.
  • More FP64 throughput
    This graphics card has a better FP64 ratio than the average graphics card (1:16 vs 1:64).
    1:16 vs 1:64
  • 7 °C lower idle temperature
    This graphics card has a lower idle temperature than the average graphics card (30 °C vs 37 °C). The average graphics card has an idle temperature of 37 °C.
    30 °C vs 37 °C
  • 2x cheaper
    GIGABYTE Radeon R9 280X WINDFORCE 3X OC Rev 2 is cheaper than the average graphics card (£260 vs £520).
    £260 vs £520
  • More FP64 throughput
    This graphics card has a better FP64 ratio than the average graphics card (1:16 vs 1:64).
    1:16 vs 1:64
  • 2.13x higher FP64 performance
    This graphics card has a higher FP64 performance than the average graphics card (1 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP64 performance of 0.48 TFLOPS.
    1.02 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS
  • 192 bit wider memory bus
    This graphics card has a wider memory bus than the average graphics card (384 bit vs 192 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 192 bit.
    384 bit vs 192 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.
  • Supports NVLink
    This graphics card supports NVLink, the average graphics card does not.
  • 1 more DVI outputs
    This graphics card has more DVI outputs than the average graphics card (1 vs 0). The average graphics card has 0 DVI outputs.
    1 vs 0
  • 7 °C lower idle temperature
    This graphics card has a lower idle temperature than the average graphics card (30 °C vs 37 °C). The average graphics card has an idle temperature of 37 °C.
    30 °C vs 37 °C
  • 7.7% lower PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a lower PSU requirement than the average graphics card (600 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    600 W vs 650 W
  • 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
  • 56.1% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,100 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    1,100 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
  • 41.7% lower review score
    Reviews score
    4.2/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10

    4.2

    Mark 7.7 is below the typical mark 7.9 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

    80%

    7.9

    Average grade

    20%

    6.5

    Popularity

    Grades by review (2)
    1 review, its grade estimated from the review text. 1 video review, counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    4.2 vs 7.2
  • 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
  • 5.6x larger process node
    This graphics card uses a larger manufacturing process than the average graphics card (28 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a manufacturing process of 5 nm.
    28 nm vs 5 nm
  • Less advanced frame generation
    This graphics card has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (no vs multi frame generation).
  • 47.9% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,000 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    1,000 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • No CUDA support
    This graphics card does not support CUDA, the average graphics card does.
  • 41.7% lower review score
    Reviews score
    4.2/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10

    4.2

    Mark 7.7 is below the typical mark 7.9 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

    80%

    7.9

    Average grade

    20%

    6.5

    Popularity

    Grades by review (2)
    1 review, its grade estimated from the review text. 1 video review, counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    4.2 vs 7.2
  • 14% worse value for money
    GIGABYTE Radeon R9 280X WINDFORCE 3X OC Rev 2 has worse value for money than the average graphics card (6.51 vs 7.4).
    6.51 vs 7.41
  • 56.1% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,100 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    1,100 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
  • 47.9% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,000 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    1,000 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • No CUDA support
    This graphics card does not support CUDA, the average graphics card does.
  • 78.2% lower pixel rate
    This graphics card has a lower pixel rate than the average graphics card (35.2 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s). The average graphics card has a pixel rate of 161.3 GPixel/s.
    35.2 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s
  • 62.8% lower texture rate
    This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (140.8 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    140.8 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • 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
  • 80% lower FP32 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP32 performance than the average graphics card (4.5 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.6 TFLOPS.
    4.51 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS
  • 56 fewer TMUs
    This graphics card has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (128 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    128 vs 184
  • 8 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (32 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    32 vs 40
  • 10 years older
    This graphics card was released earlier than the average graphics card (2013 vs 2023).
    October 2013
    2013 vs 2023
  • 77.4% lower PassMark score
    This graphics card has a lower PassMark score than the average graphics card (5,118 points vs 22,638 points). The average graphics card has a PassMark score of 22,638 points.
    5,118 points vs 22,638 points
  • 81.4% lower gaming score
    This graphics card has a lower gaming score than the average graphics card (2,754 points vs 14,779 points). The average graphics card has a gaming score of 14,779 points.
    2,754 points vs 14,779 points
  • 76.4% lower compute score
    This graphics card has a lower compute score than the average graphics card (2,843 points vs 12,70.5 points). The average graphics card has a compute score of 12,070.5 points.
    2,843 points vs 12,070.5 points
  • 2,304 fewer FP32 units
    This graphics card has fewer FP32 units than the average graphics card (2048 vs 4,352). The average graphics card has 4,352 FP32 units.
    2,048 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
  • 68.4% slower memory speed
    This graphics card has a lower effective memory speed than the average graphics card (6,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz). The average graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 19,000 MHz.
    6,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz
  • 35.7% lower memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (288 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    288 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • 87.5% smaller L1 cache
    This graphics card has fewer L1 cache than the average graphics card (16 KB vs 128 KB). The average graphics card has 128 KB L1 cache.
    16 KB vs 128 KB
  • 14.3% slower VRAM clock
    This graphics card has a lower VRAM clock than the average graphics card (1,500 MHz vs 1,750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1,750 MHz.
    1,500 MHz vs 1,750 MHz
  • 5.6x larger process node
    This graphics card uses a larger manufacturing process than the average graphics card (28 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a manufacturing process of 5 nm.
    28 nm vs 5 nm
  • Less advanced frame generation
    This graphics card has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (no vs multi frame generation).
  • 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.
  • Older PCIe version
    This graphics card supports an older PCIe version than the average graphics card (3 vs 4).
    3 vs 4
  • No AI upscalers
    This graphics card does not support AI upscalers, the average graphics card does.
  • No XeSS support
    This graphics card does not support XeSS, the average graphics card does.
  • No mesh shaders
    This graphics card does not support mesh shaders, 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
  • No Resizable BAR
    This graphics card does not support Resizable BAR, while the average graphics card does. 76.4% of Graphics cards support it.
  • Older DirectX version
    This graphics card supports an older DirectX version than the average graphics card (12 vs 12 Ultimate).
    12 vs 12 Ultimate
  • 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.
  • Older OpenCL version
    This graphics card supports an older OpenCL version than the average graphics card (2.1 vs 3).
    2.1 vs 3
  • 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
  • Older HDMI version
    This graphics card supports an older HDMI version than the average graphics card (1.4 vs 2.1a).
    1.4 vs 2.1a
  • 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 AV1 decoding
    This graphics card does not support AV1 decoding, the average graphics card does.
  • No DSC support
    This graphics card does not support DSC, the average graphics card does.
  • No VRR support
    This graphics card does not support VRR, the average graphics card does.
  • More basic codec support
    This graphics card encodes more basic formats than the average graphics card (H.264 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9).
    H.264 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9
  • 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
  • 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
  • No fan stop
    This graphics card does not support fan stop, the average graphics card does.
  • 16.3% higher TDP
    This graphics card has a higher TDP than the average graphics card (250 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    250 W vs 215 W
  • 9.6 dB noisier under load
    This graphics card has a higher load noise level than the average graphics card (45 dB vs 35.4 dB). The average graphics card has a load noise level of 35.4 dB.
    45 dB vs 35.4 dB
  • 36 dB noisier at idle
    This graphics card has a higher idle noise level than the average graphics card (36 dB vs 0 dB). The average graphics card has an idle noise level of 0 dB.
    36 dB vs 0 dB
  • 50% higher idle power draw
    This graphics card has a higher idle power draw than the average graphics card (18 W vs 12 W). The average graphics card has an idle power draw of 12 W.
    18 W vs 12 W
  • 13.6% higher board power limit
    This graphics card has a higher board power limit than the average graphics card (250 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 220 W.
    250 W vs 220 W
  • No backplate
    This graphics card does not include a backplate, the average graphics card does.
  • 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

9.0
Tech of Tomorrow
≈ estimated
15/10/2013
Hands-on review · temperatures and benchmark results
Verdict
GIGABYTE Radeon R9 280X WINDFORCE 3X OC Rev 2 earns an editors' choice for AMD fans wanting a cool, fast card for 1080p and 1440p gaming.
Not graded
Overview video

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

6.0
hardwarezone.com.sg
≈ estimated
04/11/2013
Overclock test · Windforce cooling
Verdict
The GIGABYTE Radeon R9 280X WINDFORCE 3X OC beats the GTX 770 in 3DMark and runs at 1100MHz, but it is the hottest card tested and draws heavy power.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about GIGABYTE Radeon R9 280X WINDFORCE 3X OC Rev 2

  • Effective Windforce 3X cooling system with three fans for low load temperatures
  • Factory overclocked out of the box for better performance than reference designs
  • Revision 2.0 features an improved matte black PCB over the original blue version
  • Includes a Dual BIOS feature for easier recovery and overclocking flexibility
  • Beefed-up VRM design in Rev 2.0 can enhance stability and overclocking potential
  • Excellent value for money, often priced competitively without a premium for the custom cooler

What customers don't like about GIGABYTE Radeon R9 280X WINDFORCE 3X OC Rev 2

  • High power consumption, particularly in non-gaming/idle states due to voltage circuitry
  • Very high fan noise during intensive gaming as fans work hard to dissipate massive heat
  • Significant physical length (approx. 285mm) may not fit in smaller PC cases
  • Reported issues with screen flickering and system instability in some user configurations
  • Limited overclocking potential for the included Elpida memory chips
  • Lacks modern DirectX 12 feature-level support and up-to-date official AMD drivers

Verdict

The GIGABYTE Radeon R9 280X WINDFORCE 3X OC Rev 2 is a high-performance graphics card built on the Tahiti XTL architecture, featuring 2048 stream processors, 3GB of GDDR5 memory, and a 384-bit memory interface. Factory overclocked to a 1000 MHz base and 1100 MHz boost clock, it utilizes the Windforce 3X cooling system with 'Triangle Cool' technology and three direct-touch 8mm heat pipes for effective thermal management. Its main pros include superior heat dissipation, a quiet operational profile compared to reference models, and a durable design with dual BIOS support. However, cons include a high 250W power draw requiring both 6-pin and 8-pin connectors, a long 285mm physical footprint that may challenge smaller cases, and limited additional overclocking headroom due to the aggressive factory settings.

Compare GIGABYTE Radeon R9 280X WINDFORCE 3X OC Rev 2 with other products in the Graphics cards category

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of GIGABYTE Radeon R9 280X WINDFORCE 3X OC Rev 2 and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found