R9 280x Vs Gtx 660
Price now 162$ Games supported 81% Price at present 199$ Games supported 76% Comparison of graphics carte architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters. Value for money To get the index we compare the characteristics of video cards and their relative prices. Full general performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base of operations clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, merely for precise assessment yous take to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Annotation that power consumption of some graphics cards tin can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked. Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (ability supply compatibility). Parameters of retention installed: its type, size, jitney, clock and resulting bandwidth. Note that GPUs integrated into processors take no dedicated VRAM and use a shared part of arrangement RAM. 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 (then-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. Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if yous demand some particular technology for your purposes. APIs supported, including particular versions of those APIs. Non-gaming criterion operation comparison. Note that overall benchmark performance is measured in points in 0-100 range. This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, merely if you find some perceived inconsistencies, experience free to speak up in comments section, we ordinarily fix problems rapidly. This is probably the most ubiquitous benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. It gives the graphics carte a thorough evaluation under various load, providing four split up benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, ten, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities. Benchmark coverage: 25% 3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with ii scenes, one depicting a daughter escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a infinite fleet set on on a caught planet. Information technology was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy criterion is now recommended to exist used instead. Benchmark coverage: 17% 3DMark xi is an obsolete DirectX 11 criterion by Futuremark. It used 4 tests based on two scenes, one existence few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken send, 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. Criterion coverage: 16% Deject Gate is an outdated DirectX xi feature level x 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 Tempest benchmark, it has been discontinued in Jan 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid. Benchmark coverage: 13% Burn down Strike is a DirectX 11 criterion for gaming PCs. It features 2 separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a peppery creature seemingly made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic enough graphics and is quite taxing on hardware. Criterion coverage: xiii% This is an old DirectX xi benchmark using Unigine, a 3D game engine by eponymous Russian company. It displays a fantasy medieval town sprawling over several flying islands. Version 3.0 was released in 2012, and in 2013 it was superseded by Heaven iv.0, which introduced several slight improvements, including a newer version of Unigine. Criterion coverage: five% This is an old DirectX 11 benchmark, a newer version of Unigine 3.0 with relatively pocket-size differences. Information technology displays a fantasy medieval town sprawling over several flying islands. The criterion is still sometimes used, despite its significant age, as it was released back in 2013. Benchmark coverage: 1% Cryptocurrency mining performance of Radeon R9 280X and GeForce GTX 660 Ti. Usually measured in megahashes per second. Allow'southward see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS. Here are the average frames per second in a big set of popular games across different resolutions: +33.three% −33.3% +33.3% −33.3% +33.3% −33.3% +33.three% −33.iii% +33.three% −33.3% +33.3% −33.3% +33.3% −33.iii% +33.iii% −33.3% +33.3% −33.iii% +33.iii% −33.iii% +33.3% −33.3% +33.3% −33.iii% +33.iii% −33.3% +33.3% −33.three% +33.3% −33.3% +33.3% −33.iii% +33.3% −33.3% +33.iii% −33.three% +33.3% −33.three% +33.3% −33.three% +33.3% −33.3% +33.iii% −33.3% +33.3% −33.3% +33.3% −33.3% +33.3% −33.3% +33.3% −33.3% +220% −220% +33.3% −33.3% +33.iii% −33.3% +33.3% −33.three% +33.3% −33.three% +33.3% −33.iii% +33.3% −33.3% +33.3% −33.iii% +33.3% −33.iii% +33.iii% −33.3% +33.3% −33.3% +33.3% −33.3% +33.3% −33.three% +33.3% −33.3% +33.3% −33.3% +33.3% −33.three% +33.3% −33.3% +33.3% −33.iii% +33.3% −33.3% +33.three% −33.iii% +33.iii% −33.iii% +33.3% −33.iii% +33.3% −33.3% +33.3% −33.3% +33.three% −33.3% +33.3% −33.three% +33.three% −33.3% +33.iii% −33.3% +33.3% −33.three% +33.three% −33.iii% +33.3% −33.3% +33.three% −33.3% +33.3% −33.3% +33.3% −33.3% +33.3% −33.3% +33.three% −33.3% +33.three% −33.3% +33.3% −33.3% +33.3% −33.3% +33.3% −33.iii% Judging past the results of synthetic and gaming tests, Technical City recommends AMD Radeon R9 280X since it shows better performance. Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer. Exercise you think nosotros are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card. The nearest Radeon R9 280X's NVIDIA equivalent is GeForce GTX 770, which is faster by 1% and higher by iii positions in our rating. Here are some closest NVIDIA rivals to Radeon R9 280X: We believe that the nearest equivalent to GeForce GTX 660 Ti from AMD is Radeon R9 270, which is slower by 1% and lower by 3 positions in our rating. Hither are some closest AMD rivals to GeForce GTX 660 Ti: Nosotros selected several comparisons of graphics cards with operation more or less close to those reviewed, providing yous with more than options to consider. Here you can see the user rating of the graphics cards, besides equally rate them yourself. Charge per unit AMD Radeon R9 280X on a scale of i to 5: Rate NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 Ti on a scale of one to 5: Here you can ask a question near this comparison, hold or disagree with our judgements, or report an mistake or mismatch. Graphics settings Screen resolution FPSAMD Radeon R9 280X vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 Ti
General info
Place in performance rating 246 303 Value for coin xv.14 6.84 Architecture GCN (2011−2017) Kepler (2012−2018) GPU lawmaking name Thaiti XTL GK104 Market segment Desktop Desktop Pattern reference no data Release appointment 8 October 2013 (8 years ago) 16 August 2012 (nine years ago) Launch cost (MSRP) $299 $299 Price now $162 (0.5x MSRP) $199 (0.7x MSRP) Technical specs
Pipelines / CUDA cores 2048 no data CUDA cores no information 1344 Boost clock speed yard MHz 980 MHz Number of transistors four,313 one thousand thousand 3,540 1000000 Manufacturing process technology 28 nm 28 nm Thermal design power (TDP) 250 Watt no data Texture fill rate 128.0 102.5 billion/sec Floating-point performance 4,096 gflops 2,459.5 gflops Compatibility, dimensions and requirements
Omnibus support PCIe 3.0 PCI Express 3.0 Interface PCIe 3.0 x16 PCIe iii.0 x16 Length 275 mm 9.5" (24.ane cm) Height no information 4.376" (eleven.1 cm) Width ii-slot no data Supplementary power connectors 1 x 6-pin + 1 x 8-pivot no information SLI options no information + Memory
Retentivity blazon GDDR5 no data Maximum RAM amount 3 GB no data Memory bus width 384 Bit 192-bit GDDR5 Memory clock speed no data 6.0 GB/southward Retentiveness bandwidth 288 GB/due south 144.2 GB/s Shared retentivity - - Video outputs and ports
Brandish Connectors 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort One Dual Link DVI-I, 1 Dual Link DVI-D, One HDMI, One DisplayPort Multi monitor support no data iv displays Eyefinity + no data HDMI + no data HDCP no data + Maximum VGA resolution no information 2048x1536 DisplayPort support + no data Audio input for HDMI no data Internal Technologies
AppAcceleration + no data CrossFire i no data Enduro - no data FreeSync 1 no data HD3D + no information LiquidVR ane no data PowerTune - no data TressFX 1 no data TrueAudio + no data ZeroCore - no data UVD + no data DDMA audio + no data 3D Blu-Ray no data + 3D Gaming no data + 3D Vision no data + API support
DirectX DirectX® 12 no data Shader Model 5.1 5.1 OpenGL 4.6 4.3 OpenCL 1.2 no data Vulkan + one.1.126 Mantle - no data CUDA no information + Benchmark functioning
Overall score
Mining hashrates
Bitcoin / BTC (SHA256) 494 Mh/southward 99 Mh/s Decred / DCR (Decred) i.07 Gh/s no information Ethereum / ETH (DaggerHashimoto) 14.42 Mh/southward no data Monero / XMR (CryptoNight) 0.5 kh/southward no information Zcash / ZEC (Equihash) 285 Sol/s no data Gaming performance
Full HD 64 78 4K 28 no information Full HD
Low Preset
Cyberpunk 2077 twenty−22 fourteen−16 Full Hd
Medium Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey twenty−22 fourteen−16 Assassin'due south Creed Valhalla xx−22 14−sixteen Battlefield 5 twenty−22 fourteen−16 Phone call of Duty: Modern Warfare 20−22 fourteen−xvi Cyberpunk 2077 20−22 xiv−xvi Far Cry 5 20−22 14−16 Far Cry New Dawn 20−22 14−16 Forza Horizon 4 twenty−22 14−16 Hitman 3 20−22 14−sixteen Horizon Zero Dawn 20−22 14−sixteen Red Expressionless Redemption two 20−22 14−16 Shadow of the Tomb Raider xx−22 fourteen−sixteen Watch Dogs: Legion twenty−22 xiv−sixteen Full Hard disk drive
High Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey xx−22 xiv−16 Assassin's Creed Valhalla xx−22 14−16 Battleground 5 20−22 14−16 Call of Duty: Mod Warfare 20−22 xiv−xvi Cyberpunk 2077 20−22 14−16 Far Weep 5 20−22 fourteen−16 Far Cry New Dawn twenty−22 fourteen−sixteen Forza Horizon four 20−22 14−sixteen Hitman iii xx−22 xiv−16 Horizon Zero Dawn 20−22 14−16 Metro Exodus 20−22 14−sixteen Red Dead Redemption 2 xx−22 xiv−xvi Shadow of the Tomb Raider 20−22 14−16 The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 48 fourteen−xvi Picket Dogs: Legion xx−22 14−16 Total Hard disk
Ultra Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey twenty−22 xiv−16 Assassin's Creed Valhalla 20−22 fourteen−16 Battlefield five 20−22 14−16 Cyberpunk 2077 20−22 14−16 Far Weep 5 twenty−22 14−16 Far Weep New Dawn 20−22 14−16 Forza Horizon four 20−22 fourteen−16 The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 20 14−16 Lookout man Dogs: Legion 20−22 14−sixteen 1440p
Loftier Preset
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 20−22 xiv−16 Hitman three 20−22 14−xvi Horizon Nada Dawn 20−22 14−16 Metro Exodus 20−22 fourteen−16 Ruby-red Expressionless Redemption two 20−22 14−16 Shadow of the Tomb Raider 20−22 14−16 1440p
Ultra Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey 20−22 14−16 Assassinator's Creed Valhalla 20−22 14−16 Battleground 5 xx−22 14−16 Cyberpunk 2077 20−22 14−sixteen Far Weep 5 twenty−22 14−sixteen Far Cry New Dawn 20−22 14−16 Forza Horizon 4 twenty−22 14−xvi Sentinel Dogs: Legion twenty−22 14−xvi 4K
High Preset
Phone call of Duty: Modern Warfare 20−22 14−sixteen Hitman three 20−22 14−16 Horizon Zilch Dawn twenty−22 14−xvi Metro Exodus 20−22 14−16 Ruby-red Dead Redemption 2 20−22 14−16 Shadow of the Tomb Raider 20−22 xiv−16 The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 20−22 fourteen−16 4K
Ultra Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey twenty−22 14−sixteen Assassin's Creed Valhalla 20−22 xiv−xvi Battlefield 5 20−22 fourteen−16 Cyberpunk 2077 twenty−22 xiv−16 Far Cry 5 20−22 14−xvi Far Cry New Dawn xx−22 xiv−16 Forza Horizon four twenty−22 14−16 Picket Dogs: Legion 20−22 14−sixteen Advantages and disadvantages
Performance rating 19.60 14.66 Novelty viii October 2013 16 August 2012 Memory bus width 384 192 Memory bandwidth 288 144.two
Cast your vote
Competitors of Radeon R9 280X by NVIDIA
Competitors of GeForce GTX 660 Ti by AMD
Similar GPU comparisons
User rating
Questions and comments
Source: https://technical.city/en/video/Radeon-R9-280X-vs-GeForce-GTX-660-Ti
0 Response to "R9 280x Vs Gtx 660"
Post a Comment