GeForce GTX 550 Ti vs Radeon R9 280

Place in the ranking	367	700
Place by popularity	not in top-100	75
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	5.19	0.76
Power efficiency	4.98	2.40
Architecture	GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)	Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)
GPU code name	Tahiti	GF116
Market segment	Desktop	Desktop
Design	reference	no data
Release date	4 March 2014 (10 years ago)	15 March 2011 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$279	$149

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

R9 280 has 583% better value for money than GTX 550 Ti.

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 cores	1792	192
Core clock speed	no data	900 MHz
Boost clock speed	933 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	4,313 million	1,170 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	200 Watt	116 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature	no data	100 °C
Texture fill rate	104.5	28.80
Floating-point processing power	3.344 TFLOPS	0.6912 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	24
TMUs	112	32

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 support	PCIe 3.0	16x PCI-E 2.0
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 2.0 x16
Length	275 mm	210 mm
Height	no data	4.376" (11.1 cm)
Width	2-slot	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	1 x 6-pin + 1 x 8-pin	1x 6-pin
SLI options	-	+

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 type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	3 GB	2 GB
Memory bus width	384 Bit	192 Bit
Memory clock speed	1250 MHz	4.1 GB/s
Memory bandwidth	240 GB/s	98.4 GB/s

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 Connectors	2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 2x mini-DisplayPort	Two Dual Link DVI-IMini HDMI
Multi monitor support	no data	+
Eyefinity	+	-
HDMI	+	+
Maximum VGA resolution	no data	2048x1536
Audio input for HDMI	no data	Internal

Supported technologies

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

CrossFire	+	-
FreeSync	+	-
HD3D	+	-
LiquidVR	+	-
TressFX	+	-
TrueAudio	+	-
UVD	+	-
DDMA audio	+	no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	DirectX® 12	12 (11_0)
Shader Model	5.1	5.1
OpenGL	4.6	4.2
OpenCL	1.2	1.1
Vulkan	+	N/A
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.

R9 280 13.80
+258%

GTX 550 Ti 3.86

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.

R9 280 5556
+258%

GTX 550 Ti 1554

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:

900p	130−140 +242%	38 −242%
Full HD	120−130 +233%	36 −233%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

2.33
+78%

4.14

−78%

R9 280 has 78% lower cost per frame in 1080p

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Metro Exodus	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Valorant	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Dota 2	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Far Cry 5	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Fortnite	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Metro Exodus	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Valorant	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
World of Tanks	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Dota 2	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Far Cry 5	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Valorant	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
World of Tanks	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Far Cry 5	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Metro Exodus	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Valorant	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Dota 2	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Metro Exodus	0−1	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Dota 2	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Far Cry 5	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Fortnite	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Valorant	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%

This is how R9 280 and GTX 550 Ti compete in popular games:

R9 280 is 242% faster in 900p
R9 280 is 233% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 62 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	13.80	3.86
Recency	4 March 2014	15 March 2011
Maximum RAM amount	3 GB	2 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	200 Watt	116 Watt

R9 280 has a 257.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 50% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

GTX 550 Ti, on the other hand, has 72.4% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R9 280 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 550 Ti in performance tests.

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