Radeon R9 280X vs GeForce GTX 1050 Ti

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 1050 Ti and Radeon R9 280X, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTX 1050 Ti
2016
4 GB GDDR5, 75 Watt
16.39
+8.2%

GTX 1050 Ti outperforms R9 280X by a small 8% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking331352
Place by popularity5not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation14.025.57
Power efficiency14.984.15
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)
GPU code nameGP107Tahiti
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Designno datareference
Release date25 October 2016 (8 years ago)8 October 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$139 $299

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTX 1050 Ti has 152% better value for money than R9 280X.

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 cores7682048
Core clock speed1291 MHzno data
Boost clock speed1392 MHz1000 MHz
Number of transistors3,300 million4,313 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt250 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature97 °Cno data
Texture fill rate66.82128.0
Floating-point processing power2.138 TFLOPS4.096 TFLOPS
ROPs3232
TMUs48128

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
Length145 mm275 mm
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone1 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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount4 GB3 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit384 Bit
Memory clock speed7008 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth112 GB/s288 GB/s
Shared memory--

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 DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
Eyefinity-+
HDMI++
DisplayPort support-+
G-SYNC 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 audiono data+
VR Ready+no data
Ansel+-

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12 (12_1)DirectX® 12
Shader Model6.45.1
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.2.131+
CUDA+-

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark 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.

GTX 1050 Ti 16.39
+8.2%
R9 280X 15.15

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. 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.

GTX 1050 Ti 6317
+8.2%
R9 280X 5837

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

GTX 1050 Ti 9453
R9 280X 10792
+14.2%

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.

GTX 1050 Ti 7485
R9 280X 8343
+11.5%

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

GTX 1050 Ti 50939
R9 280X 52117
+2.3%

3DMark Ice Storm GPU

Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.

GTX 1050 Ti 352876
+23.7%
R9 280X 285376

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 HD50
−28%
64
+28%
1440p29
+20.8%
24−27
−20.8%
4K24
−29.2%
31
+29.2%

Cost per frame, $

1080p2.784.67
1440p4.7912.46
4K5.799.65

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+8.3%
24−27
−8.3%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 48
+41.2%
30−35
−41.2%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 27−30
+8%
24−27
−8%
Battlefield 5 53
+8.2%
45−50
−8.2%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−35
+10%
30−33
−10%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+8.3%
24−27
−8.3%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+8.6%
35−40
−8.6%
Far Cry New Dawn 40−45
+7.3%
40−45
−7.3%
Forza Horizon 4 100−110
+7.1%
95−100
−7.1%
Hitman 3 30−35
+6.9%
27−30
−6.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn 80−85
+6.5%
75−80
−6.5%
Metro Exodus 56
+9.8%
50−55
−9.8%
Red Dead Redemption 2 45−50
+9.8%
40−45
−9.8%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 80
+63.3%
45−50
−63.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 80−85
+5.1%
75−80
−5.1%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 64
+88.2%
30−35
−88.2%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 27−30
+8%
24−27
−8%
Battlefield 5 44
−11.4%
45−50
+11.4%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−35
+10%
30−33
−10%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+8.3%
24−27
−8.3%
Far Cry 5 35
+0%
35−40
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 41
+0%
40−45
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 100−110
+7.1%
95−100
−7.1%
Hitman 3 30−35
+6.9%
27−30
−6.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn 80−85
+6.5%
75−80
−6.5%
Metro Exodus 46
−10.9%
50−55
+10.9%
Red Dead Redemption 2 45−50
+9.8%
40−45
−9.8%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 50
+2%
45−50
−2%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
−189%
110
+189%
Watch Dogs: Legion 80−85
+5.1%
75−80
−5.1%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 24
−41.7%
30−35
+41.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 27−30
+8%
24−27
−8%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−35
+10%
30−33
−10%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+8.3%
24−27
−8.3%
Far Cry 5 27
−29.6%
35−40
+29.6%
Forza Horizon 4 45
−118%
95−100
+118%
Hitman 3 30−35
+6.9%
27−30
−6.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45
−71.1%
75−80
+71.1%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 43
−14%
45−50
+14%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 26
+30%
20
−30%
Watch Dogs: Legion 80−85
+5.1%
75−80
−5.1%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 45−50
+9.8%
40−45
−9.8%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 30−35
+10.3%
27−30
−10.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 24−27
+8.7%
21−24
−8.7%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 16−18
+6.7%
14−16
−6.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 14−16
+16.7%
12−14
−16.7%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18−20
+12.5%
16−18
−12.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+12.5%
8−9
−12.5%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+11.8%
16−18
−11.8%
Forza Horizon 4 75
−5.3%
75−80
+5.3%
Hitman 3 18−20
+5.6%
18−20
−5.6%
Horizon Zero Dawn 32
+3.2%
30−35
−3.2%
Metro Exodus 29
+7.4%
27−30
−7.4%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 30
+11.1%
27−30
−11.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+12.5%
16−18
−12.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion 95−100
+6.5%
90−95
−6.5%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 27−30
+8%
24−27
−8%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 16−18
+6.7%
14−16
−6.7%
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14
+9.1%
10−12
−9.1%
Hitman 3 12−14
+9.1%
10−12
−9.1%
Horizon Zero Dawn 80−85
+9.2%
75−80
−9.2%
Metro Exodus 14
−7.1%
14−16
+7.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+14.3%
14−16
−14.3%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+12.5%
8−9
−12.5%
Forza Horizon 4 20
+0%
20−22
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 17
+13.3%
14−16
−13.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+7.1%
14−16
−7.1%

This is how GTX 1050 Ti and R9 280X compete in popular games:

  • R9 280X is 28% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 1050 Ti is 21% faster in 1440p
  • R9 280X is 29% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Assassin's Creed Odyssey, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the GTX 1050 Ti is 88% faster.
  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the R9 280X is 189% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GTX 1050 Ti is ahead in 57 tests (79%)
  • R9 280X is ahead in 10 tests (14%)
  • there's a draw in 5 tests (7%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 16.39 15.15
Recency 25 October 2016 8 October 2013
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 3 GB
Chip lithography 14 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 250 Watt

GTX 1050 Ti has a 8.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 33.3% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 233.3% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between GeForce GTX 1050 Ti and Radeon R9 280X.


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.


NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti
GeForce GTX 1050 Ti
AMD Radeon R9 280X
Radeon R9 280X

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.


1.3 206911 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 1050 Ti on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 693 votes

Rate Radeon R9 280X 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.