FirePro V5900 vs Radeon R9 M280X

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 M280X with FirePro V5900, including specs and performance data.

R9 M280X
2015
0 MB Not Listed
2.11

V5900 outperforms R9 M280X by an impressive 55% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking864737
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data3.16
ArchitectureGCN 2.0 (2013−2017)TeraScale 3 (2010−2013)
GPU code nameSaturnCayman
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date5 February 2015 (9 years ago)24 May 2011 (13 years ago)

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 cores896512
Core clock speed1000 MHz600 MHz
Number of transistors2,080 million2,640 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data75 Watt
Texture fill rate61.6019.20
Floating-point processing power1.971 TFLOPS0.6144 TFLOPS
ROPs1632
TMUs5632

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).

Laptop sizelargeno data
Bus supportNot Listedno data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Lengthno data230 mm
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeNot ListedGDDR5
Maximum RAM amount0 MB2 GB
Memory bus widthNot Listed256 Bit
Memory clock speedno data500 MHz
Memory bandwidth96 GB/s64 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 ConnectorsNo outputs1x DVI

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync+-
HD3D+-
PowerTune+-
DualGraphics+-
ZeroCore+-
Switchable graphics+-

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1111.2 (11_0)
Shader Model6.35.0
OpenGL4.44.4
OpenCLNot Listed1.2
Vulkan-N/A
Mantle+-

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 M280X 2.11
FirePro V5900 3.28
+55.5%

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 M280X 813
FirePro V5900 1264
+55.5%

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 HD27
−48.1%
40−45
+48.1%
4K18
−50%
27−30
+50%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
−42.9%
10−11
+42.9%
Battlefield 5 13
−38.5%
18−20
+38.5%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7
−50%
9−10
+50%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
−33.3%
12−14
+33.3%
Hitman 3 7−8
−42.9%
10−11
+42.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20
−50%
27−30
+50%
Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 30
−50%
45−50
+50%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
−52.8%
55−60
+52.8%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
−42.9%
10−11
+42.9%
Battlefield 5 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7
−50%
9−10
+50%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
−33.3%
12−14
+33.3%
Hitman 3 7−8
−42.9%
10−11
+42.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20
−50%
27−30
+50%
Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
−40%
14−16
+40%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 39
−53.8%
60−65
+53.8%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
−52.8%
55−60
+52.8%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
−42.9%
10−11
+42.9%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7
−50%
9−10
+50%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
−33.3%
12−14
+33.3%
Hitman 3 7−8
−42.9%
10−11
+42.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20
−50%
27−30
+50%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
−40%
14−16
+40%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9
−33.3%
12−14
+33.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
−52.8%
55−60
+52.8%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Hitman 3 7−8
−42.9%
10−11
+42.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn 6−7
−50%
9−10
+50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 12−14
−50%
18−20
+50%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 0−1 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%

This is how R9 M280X and FirePro V5900 compete in popular games:

  • FirePro V5900 is 48% faster in 1080p
  • FirePro V5900 is 50% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.11 3.28
Recency 5 February 2015 24 May 2011
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm

R9 M280X has an age advantage of 3 years, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

FirePro V5900, on the other hand, has a 55.5% higher aggregate performance score.

The FirePro V5900 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R9 M280X in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R9 M280X is a notebook card while FirePro V5900 is a workstation one.


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 M280X
Radeon R9 M280X
AMD FirePro V5900
FirePro V5900

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.


2.7 3 votes

Rate Radeon R9 M280X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 48 votes

Rate FirePro V5900 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.