P102-100 vs Radeon RX 480

Place in the ranking	260	539
Place by popularity	89	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	15.86	3.29
Power efficiency	10.21	2.10
Architecture	GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)	Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code name	Ellesmere	GP102
GCN generation	4th Gen	no data
Market segment	Desktop	Workstation
Design	reference	no data
Release date	29 June 2016 (8 years ago)	12 February 2018 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$229	$599

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

RX 480 has 382% better value for money than P102-100.

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	2304	3200
Compute units	36	no data
Core clock speed	1120 MHz	1582 MHz
Boost clock speed	1266 MHz	1683 MHz
Number of transistors	5,700 million	11,800 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	16 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	150 Watt	250 Watt
Texture fill rate	182.3	336.6
Floating-point processing power	5.834 TFLOPS	10.77 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	80
TMUs	144	200

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	n/a	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x4
Length	241 mm	267 mm
Width	2-slot	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	1x 6-pin	2x 8-pin
Bridgeless CrossFire	+	-

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	GDDR5X
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	5 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	320 Bit
Memory clock speed	8000 MHz	1376 MHz
Memory bandwidth	224 GB/s	440.3 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 Connectors	1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort	No outputs
Eyefinity	+	-
HDMI	2.0	-
DisplayPort support	1.4HDR	-

Supported technologies

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

AppAcceleration	n/a	-
CrossFire	+	-
Enduro	n/a	-
FRTC	+	-
FreeSync	+	-
HD3D	n/a	-
LiquidVR	+	-
PowerTune	+	-
TressFX	+	-
TrueAudio	n/a	-
ZeroCore	+	-
UVD	+	-
VCE	+	-

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX	DirectX® 12	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	6.4	6.4
OpenGL	4.5	4.6
OpenCL	2.0	1.2
Vulkan	+	1.2.131
Mantle	n/a	-
CUDA	-	6.1

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.

RX 480 22.35
+192%

P102-100 7.66

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.

RX 480 8590
+192%

P102-100 2945

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 HD	77 +221%	24−27 −221%
1440p	53 +194%	18−20 −194%
4K	36 +200%	12−14 −200%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	2.97 +739%	24.96 −739%
1440p	4.32 +670%	33.28 −670%
4K	6.36 +685%	49.92 −685%

RX 480 has 739% lower cost per frame in 1080p
RX 480 has 670% lower cost per frame in 1440p
RX 480 has 685% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart	55−60 +211%	18−20 −211%
Counter-Strike 2	40−45 +233%	12−14 −233%
Cyberpunk 2077	45−50 +221%	14−16 −221%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart	55−60 +211%	18−20 −211%
Battlefield 5	85−90 +215%	27−30 −215%
Counter-Strike 2	40−45 +233%	12−14 −233%
Cyberpunk 2077	45−50 +221%	14−16 −221%
Far Cry 5	70−75 +196%	24−27 −196%
Fortnite	207 +196%	70−75 −196%
Forza Horizon 4	100 +233%	30−33 −233%
Forza Horizon 5	55−60 +228%	18−20 −228%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	80−85 +196%	27−30 −196%
Valorant	150−160 +202%	50−55 −202%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart	55−60 +211%	18−20 −211%
Battlefield 5	85−90 +215%	27−30 −215%
Counter-Strike 2	40−45 +233%	12−14 −233%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive	285 +200%	95−100 −200%
Cyberpunk 2077	45−50 +221%	14−16 −221%
Dota 2	110−120 +226%	35−40 −226%
Far Cry 5	70−75 +196%	24−27 −196%
Fortnite	79 +193%	27−30 −193%
Forza Horizon 4	93 +210%	30−33 −210%
Forza Horizon 5	55−60 +228%	18−20 −228%
Grand Theft Auto V	78 +225%	24−27 −225%
Metro Exodus	41 +193%	14−16 −193%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	80−85 +196%	27−30 −196%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	78 +225%	24−27 −225%
Valorant	150−160 +202%	50−55 −202%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	85−90 +215%	27−30 −215%
Counter-Strike 2	29 +222%	9−10 −222%
Cyberpunk 2077	45−50 +221%	14−16 −221%
Dota 2	110−120 +226%	35−40 −226%
Far Cry 5	70−75 +196%	24−27 −196%
Forza Horizon 4	77 +221%	24−27 −221%
Forza Horizon 5	55−60 +228%	18−20 −228%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	45 +221%	14−16 −221%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	44 +214%	14−16 −214%
Valorant	150−160 +202%	50−55 −202%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite

65
+210%

21−24

−210%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	21−24 +200%	7−8 −200%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive	150−160 +200%	50−55 −200%
Grand Theft Auto V	37 +208%	12−14 −208%
Metro Exodus	27−30 +200%	9−10 −200%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 +216%	55−60 −216%
Valorant	241 +201%	80−85 −201%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	55−60 +228%	18−20 −228%
Cyberpunk 2077	20−22 +233%	6−7 −233%
Far Cry 5	45−50 +194%	16−18 −194%
Forza Horizon 4	50−55 +194%	18−20 −194%
Forza Horizon 5	35−40 +217%	12−14 −217%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	30−35 +240%	10−11 −240%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite

39
+225%

12−14

−225%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart	16−18 +240%	5−6 −240%
Counter-Strike 2	10−11 +233%	3−4 −233%
Grand Theft Auto V	36 +200%	12−14 −200%
Metro Exodus	15 +200%	5−6 −200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	27 +200%	9−10 −200%
Valorant	120 +200%	40−45 −200%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	30−35 +220%	10−11 −220%
Counter-Strike 2	10−11 +233%	3−4 −233%
Cyberpunk 2077	9−10 +200%	3−4 −200%
Dota 2	88 +193%	30−33 −193%
Far Cry 5	21−24 +229%	7−8 −229%
Forza Horizon 4	35−40 +208%	12−14 −208%
Forza Horizon 5	18−20 +217%	6−7 −217%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	16 +220%	5−6 −220%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite

+200%

6−7
−200%

This is how RX 480 and P102-100 compete in popular games:

RX 480 is 221% faster in 1080p
RX 480 is 194% faster in 1440p
RX 480 is 200% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	22.35	7.66
Recency	29 June 2016	12 February 2018
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	5 GB
Chip lithography	14 nm	16 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	150 Watt	250 Watt

RX 480 has a 191.8% higher aggregate performance score, a 60% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 14.3% more advanced lithography process, and 66.7% lower power consumption.

P102-100, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year.

The Radeon RX 480 is our recommended choice as it beats the P102-100 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon RX 480 is a desktop card while P102-100 is a workstation one.