Radeon RX 6700 vs R9 280X

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 280X and Radeon RX 6700, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

R9 280X
2013
3 GB GDDR5, 250 Watt
15.13

RX 6700 outperforms R9 280X by a whopping 231% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking34758
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation5.43no data
Power efficiency4.1919.81
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code nameTahitiNavi 22
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Designreferenceno data
Release date8 October 2013 (11 years ago)9 June 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$299 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores20482304
Core clock speedno data1941 MHz
Boost clock speed1000 MHz2450 MHz
Number of transistors4,313 million17,200 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Watt175 Watt
Texture fill rate128.0352.8
Floating-point processing power4.096 TFLOPS11.29 TFLOPS
ROPs3264
TMUs128144
Ray Tracing Coresno data36

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 supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Length275 mm267 mm
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors1 x 6-pin + 1 x 8-pin1x 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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount3 GB10 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit160 Bit
Memory clock speedno data2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth288 GB/s320.0 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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort1x HDMI 2.1, 2x DisplayPort 1.4a, 1x USB Type-C
Eyefinity+-
HDMI++
DisplayPort 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 audio+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.16.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.1
Vulkan+1.3

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 280X 15.13
RX 6700 50.06
+231%

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 280X 5837
RX 6700 19317
+231%

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 HD62
−223%
200−210
+223%
4K36
−206%
110−120
+206%

Cost per frame, $

1080p4.82no data
4K8.31no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
−213%
75−80
+213%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30−35
−224%
110−120
+224%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 24−27
−220%
80−85
+220%
Battlefield 5 45−50
−227%
160−170
+227%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−33
−217%
95−100
+217%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
−213%
75−80
+213%
Far Cry 5 35−40
−214%
110−120
+214%
Far Cry New Dawn 40−45
−217%
130−140
+217%
Forza Horizon 4 95−100
−206%
300−310
+206%
Hitman 3 27−30
−228%
95−100
+228%
Horizon Zero Dawn 75−80
−225%
250−260
+225%
Metro Exodus 50−55
−214%
160−170
+214%
Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
−217%
130−140
+217%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 45−50
−227%
160−170
+227%
Watch Dogs: Legion 75−80
−221%
250−260
+221%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30−35
−224%
110−120
+224%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 24−27
−220%
80−85
+220%
Battlefield 5 45−50
−227%
160−170
+227%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−33
−217%
95−100
+217%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
−213%
75−80
+213%
Far Cry 5 35−40
−214%
110−120
+214%
Far Cry New Dawn 40−45
−217%
130−140
+217%
Forza Horizon 4 95−100
−206%
300−310
+206%
Hitman 3 27−30
−228%
95−100
+228%
Horizon Zero Dawn 75−80
−225%
250−260
+225%
Metro Exodus 50−55
−214%
160−170
+214%
Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
−217%
130−140
+217%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 45−50
−227%
160−170
+227%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 110
−218%
350−400
+218%
Watch Dogs: Legion 75−80
−221%
250−260
+221%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30−35
−224%
110−120
+224%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 24−27
−220%
80−85
+220%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−33
−217%
95−100
+217%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
−213%
75−80
+213%
Far Cry 5 35−40
−214%
110−120
+214%
Forza Horizon 4 95−100
−206%
300−310
+206%
Hitman 3 27−30
−228%
95−100
+228%
Horizon Zero Dawn 75−80
−225%
250−260
+225%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 45−50
−227%
160−170
+227%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 20
−225%
65−70
+225%
Watch Dogs: Legion 75−80
−221%
250−260
+221%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
−217%
130−140
+217%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 27−30
−228%
95−100
+228%
Far Cry New Dawn 21−24
−226%
75−80
+226%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16
−200%
45−50
+200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14
−192%
35−40
+192%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16−18
−213%
50−55
+213%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
−200%
24−27
+200%
Far Cry 5 16−18
−224%
55−60
+224%
Forza Horizon 4 75−80
−229%
260−270
+229%
Hitman 3 18−20
−206%
55−60
+206%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
−223%
100−105
+223%
Metro Exodus 27−30
−215%
85−90
+215%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27−30
−215%
85−90
+215%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
−213%
50−55
+213%
Watch Dogs: Legion 90−95
−223%
300−310
+223%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
−220%
80−85
+220%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
−200%
45−50
+200%
Far Cry New Dawn 10−12
−218%
35−40
+218%
Hitman 3 10−12
−218%
35−40
+218%
Horizon Zero Dawn 75−80
−229%
250−260
+229%
Metro Exodus 14−16
−200%
45−50
+200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
−221%
45−50
+221%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
−200%
27−30
+200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 7−8
−200%
21−24
+200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8−9
−200%
24−27
+200%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−200%
6−7
+200%
Far Cry 5 8−9
−200%
24−27
+200%
Forza Horizon 4 20−22
−225%
65−70
+225%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 14−16
−200%
45−50
+200%
Watch Dogs: Legion 6−7
−200%
18−20
+200%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
−221%
45−50
+221%

This is how R9 280X and RX 6700 compete in popular games:

  • RX 6700 is 223% faster in 1080p
  • RX 6700 is 206% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 15.13 50.06
Recency 8 October 2013 9 June 2021
Maximum RAM amount 3 GB 10 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 250 Watt 175 Watt

RX 6700 has a 230.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 233.3% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 300% more advanced lithography process, and 42.9% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX 6700 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R9 280X 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 R9 280X
Radeon R9 280X
AMD Radeon RX 6700
Radeon RX 6700

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.


4.1 687 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3 1355 votes

Rate Radeon RX 6700 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.