R9 280X: video cards compete in the second tier

Dec

11

2013

In early October, AMD introduced the R9 280X as the new high-end graphics card for demanding gamers. The new Tahiti XTL-chip looked suspiciously indeed many of the AMD chip used in the HD 7970 GHz, and on closer inspection turned out to be the same chip to go. The review copy of the video card was therefore simply recognized as HD 7970 in our test system with an old AMD driver.

The 280X is a rebrand, but it appears to have on the popularity of the GPU no influence. In PriceWatch are three of the ten most popular video cards at the time of writing a R9 280X. Hence, we have four of these video cards there and grabbed them merged into a round-up.

R9 280X roundup From left to right: Asus, Club3D, Gigabyte, MSI

The four cards in this round-up comes from Asus, Club3D, Gigabyte and MSI. AMD has left manufacturers the freedom to adjust the clock speeds and the coolers of the cards and delivers four recognizable 280X-variants, with Matrix, Cool Stream, Wind Force and TwinFrozr coolers. Asus Matrix card is specially made to be overclocking, but is 330 euros more expensive than the other three, the price is around 260 euros. We have therefore measured which of the three is the best cheap tickets and looked at whether it makes sense to provide extra pulling the Matrix card. From 70 euros Club3D, Gigabyte, MSI and Asus
Club3D

Club3D has two cards with the R9 280X GPU built on the eye are identical, a sticker after. The sticker with the big red K between the two fans in shows that you are dealing with a Royal King version, which is standard overclocked up to 1100MHz. The Royal Queen edition, with identical Coolstream cooler, lacks the tab, and tap up to 1000MHz.

Club3D R9 280X RoyalKing

We tested the fastest of the two, the Royal King version. The GPU is clocked at 1100MHz as said, while memory 6000MHz meetikt, as with the reference design. The Coolstream cooler features two 80mm-venitlators.
Gigabyte

Like Club3D Gigabyte sells two versions of the Gigabyte 280X R9. The differences are thereby not present in the clock frequencies, but in the design of the cooler. Gigabyte indicates the difference between the two cards with ‘revision 1’ and ‘revision 2’. The GPU frequency of Gigabytes 280X maximum 1100MHz while the memory speed of 6000MHz is left untouched.

Gigabyte R9 280X

Gigabyte R9 280X Revisies

The R9 280X that we tested is revision 1 of the card, with the Windforce cooler with thick plastic cover. Revision 2 has a metal cover, with more openings. It is unclear whether there is a difference in cooling performance between the two revisions. Both coolers have already been passed in review with us, but were mounted on different chips, so we could make no comparison.
MSI

MSI 280X delivers his R9 in a release. Although there is a choice of a model with and a version without Battlefield 4, but the video card is equal in both cases. The GPU MSI is the slowest of the quartet and tap up to 1050MHz. The memory does a speed of 6000MHz GDDR5.

MSI R9 280X

The TwinFrozr cooler on the 280X is also an old friend. MSI has been for a while use of different variants of the condenser, which is provided with two fans with a diameter of 92 millimeters. As a result, the card is slightly wider than that of Club3D and Gigabyte.
Asus

Asus Matrix Platinum is an odd man out in this round-up. The cards from Club3D, Gigabyte and MSI are all more or less “standard”. Apart from its own cooler and slightly increased clock speeds, manufacturers have the changes to the video card been limited. Asus also has a ‘normal’ R9 280X range, but has also decided to bring out. Matrix two variants of the R9 280X GPU The fastest of the two, the Matrix Platinum, we have included in this round-up to see how far we can overclock. The 280X GPU

Asus R9 280X Matrix Platinum

Besides an extra thick cooler 280X Matrix features a voltage control with buttons on the pcb and six video outputs. With four DisplayPort and two DVI connectors, the video card, the maximum six screens directly without using a separate MST hub. Use

Next page (Benchmarks and drivers – 3/10) Benchmarks and drivers

The four video cards have been tested in our test system with Ivy Bridge-E processor and 16GB of memory. 13:11 We used the beta v1 driver, which came out in October. Meanwhile, AMD has been five new versions of the beta driver put online, where the 13:11 beta v6 driver higher frame rates include Grid 2, Battlefield 3 and Sleeping Dogs can bring.
Test system
Motherboard ASUS ROG Rampage IV Extreme
Processor Intel Core i7 4960X @ 4,4 GHz
Memory Kingston HyperX KHX1866C9D3K4/16GX
Ssd Kingston HyperX 240GB
Cooler Intel Thermal Solution RTS2011LC
Nutrition Corsair Professional Gold AX750
Monitor Dell U2711H
OS Windows 8.1 Enterprise

That was a problem because we had a few video cards already tested the beta-1 driver and one of them was returned. Been to the manufacturer Therefore, we decided to test, in order to keep the playing field. Flush all cards with the beta-1 driver None of the beta drivers since 13:11 v6 affects the performance of the 280X. These drivers only lead to improvements in the 290 video cards and when using CrossFire.
Graphics cards Clock Frequency (max.) Memory Speed
AMD reference velocity 1000MHz 6000MHz GDDR5
Club3D CGAX-R928X7O 1100MHz 6000MHz GDDR5
Gigabyte GV-R928XOC-3GD rev. 1 1100MHz 6000MHz GDDR5
MSI 280X R9 3G Video 1050MHz 6000MHz GDDR5
Asus MATRIX R9280X-P-3GD5 1100MHz 6400MHz GDDR5

For clarity, we have all the video cards with associated clock frequencies put on a list. Three of them get an overclock of 100MHz along, while the clock frequency of 50MHz with MSI is incremented. Asus Matrix card has the best credentials for the benchmarks, because with this video card memory is also overclocked by default. High clock speeds say nothing all. If cooling can not handle the high clock speeds, the GPU automatically tap a lower frequency, which obviously results in lower frame rates.

Next page (Synthetic benchmarks – 4/10)
Synthetic benchmarks

We turn to start the synthetic benchmarks 3DMark and Unigine Heaven. Ethanol has a first indication of the performance of the four cards and leave immediately see whether higher clock speeds make much difference.
3DMark Fire Strike
Graphics cards In points, higher is better
R9 290x
*******
11068
R9 290
******
10264
GTX 780
******
9630
R9 280X Matrix
******
8770
R9 280X Club3D
******
8741
R9 280X Gigabyte
*****
8625
MSI 280X R9
*****
8421
HD 7970 GHz
*****
8179
GTX 770
*****
7650
R9 270x
****
6053
R9 270
****
5710

In 3DMark is as expected, the Asus card the fastest and the slowest MSI. It is the fastest 280X moreover, only about four percent faster than the slowest.
Unigine Heaven 4.0 – normal
Graphics cards In points, higher is better
R9 290x
*******
2373.00
GTX 780
*******
2251.00
R9 290
*******
2235.00
R9 280X Club3D
*****
1800.00
R9 280X Matrix
*****
1790.00
R9 280X Gigabyte
*****
1740.00
MSI 280X R9
*****
1720.00
GTX 770
*****
1676.00
HD 7970 GHz
*****
1645.00
R9 270x
****
1207.00
R9 270
***
1156.00

In Heaven, the difference between the fastest and the slowest video card just over four percent. Remarkably, the fastest 280X in this case the Asus, but the Club3D card.

Next page (1920×1080: Crysis and Far Cry – 5/10) 1920×1080: Crysis and Far Cry

The most common screen resolution, which is 1920×1080 pixels, we ran Crysis 3 and Far Cry 3.
Crysis 3 – 1920×1080 – Very High
Graphics cards Minimum / average frame rate in fps, higher is better
R9 290x
*****
+
**
42.7 / 60.7
R9 290
*****
+
**
42.8 / 58.5
GTX 780
*****
+
**
43.7 / 58.1
GTX 770
*****
+
*
42,0 / 51,4
R9 280X Matrix
*****
+
*
40,0 / 50,4
R9 280X Club3D
*****
+
*
40,0 / 50,3
R9 280X Gigabyte
****
+
*
39.0 / 48.9
MSI 280X R9
****
+
*
38.0 / 47.5
HD 7970 GHz
****
+
*
38.0 / 47.2
R9 270x
***
+
*
30.0 / 37.1
R9 270
***
+
*
28.7 / 35.2

No surprises in Crysis 3, the Asus is the fastest, the slowest MSI. With all four cards is the perfect game to play. These resolution
Far Cry 3 – 1920×1080 – Ultra
Graphics cards Minimum / average frame rate in fps, higher is better
GTX 780
******
+
*
54.0 / 64.8
R9 290x
*****
+
*
49.7 / 61.4
R9 290
*****
+
*
46,7 / 57,1
GTX 770
*****
+
*
46.0 / 53.3
R9 280X Matrix
****
+
**
34.0 / 49.9
R9 280X Club3D
****
+
*
40.3 / 49.7
R9 280X Gigabyte
***
+
**
32.3 / 49.0
MSI 280X R9
****
+
**
34,7 / 47,5
HD 7970 GHz
****
+
**
33,3 / 47,1
R9 270x
***
+
*
25.0 / 35.2
R9 270
***
+
*
26,3 / 33,2

In Far Cry 3, we see the same order as in Crysis 3. Remarkably, the 280X from Club3D a minimum frame rate of 40.3 fps shows where the other three cards have drops to 34fps. The cause of frame drops is not clear. We have benchmarks turned back several times and came to this average value from.

Next page (1920×1080: Grid 2, Shogun 2 and Sleeping Dogs – 6/10) 1920×1080: Grid 2, Shogun 2 and Sleeping Dogs
Grid 2 – 1920×1080 – Ultra – 8xMSAA
Graphics cards Minimum / average frame rate in fps, higher is better
R9 290x
*****
+
**
81.5 / 106.2
R9 290
*****
+
**
82.2 / 104.1
GTX 780
******
+
*
84.9 / 103.4
R9 280X Club3D
*****
+
*
72.4 / 92.3
R9 280X Gigabyte
*****
+
*
71.7 / 92.0
MSI 280X R9
*****
+
*
70.5 / 89.2
R9 280X Matrix
****
+
*
68.5 / 89.0
GTX 770
****
+
*
65.0 / 83.1
R9 270
***
+
*
51.9 / 65.0

All the results in Grid 2 close together, it is striking that the video card is the fastest on paper, here is the worst. Perhaps this is due to cooling problems. Grid 2 is one of the longest-running benchmarks that we run and the cooling of the Matrix card was not optimal due to excessive thermal paste, as revealed during overclocking.
Shogun 2: Total War – 1920×1080 – Ultra
Graphics cards Minimum / average frame rate in fps, higher is better
R9 290x
*****
+
**
67.0 / 88.5
GTX 780
*****
+
**
60,0 / 83,1
R9 290
*****
+
**
61,7 / 82,0
R9 280X Matrix
****
+
*
56.0 / 72.4
R9 280X Club3D
****
+
*
55.7 / 72.4
R9 280X Gigabyte
****
+
*
56.0 / 71.9
MSI 280X R9
****
+
*
54.0 / 70.0
GTX 770
****
+
**
51.0 / 68.6
HD 7970 GHz
****
+
*
51.0 / 65.5
R9 270
****
+
*
45,6 / 63,0
R9 270x
**
+
*
20.0 / 28.6

In Shogun 2, we run the built-in benchmark on ultra settings. With a minimum of more than 50fps, the game is perfectly playable on all four video cards.
Sleeping Dogs – 1920×1080 – Ultra
Graphics cards Minimum / average frame rate in fps, higher is better
R9 290x
****
+
***
76.9 / 122.7
R9 290
****
+
**
75.6 / 115.8
R9 280X Club3D
****
+
**
68.7 / 104.9
R9 280X Gigabyte
****
+
**
67.8 / 103.6
R9 280X Matrix
****
+
**
71.1 / 102.7
GTX 780
***
+
**
61.0 / 98.2
HD 7970 GHz
****
+
**
67.7 / 97.6
MSI 280X R9
****
+
**
68.2 / 97.5
GTX 770
***
+
**
55,6 / 86,8
R9 270x
***
+
*
50.4 / 72.7
R9 270
***
+
*
48.1 / 70.5

In Sleeping Dogs finally seems to have the MSI are lower clocked GPU or experiencing heat problems. Load The frame rates of the other three video cards again are close together.

Next page (R9 280X Matrix: Overclocking – 7/10) R9 280X Matrix: overclocking

Initially we were not going to the 280X video cards that we received overclockable, but when the 1409 grams heavy 280X Matrix unpacked, we decided that a review of this card is not complete without us messing with the frequencies.
Cooling and voltage regulation

For the power users to make it as easy as possible Asus has chosen to assemble. A hefty cooler on the R9-chip The video card thus take three slots occupied and used the maximum width. Two fans with a diameter of 92mm enough to blow air over the cooling fins to keep. Monster card cool
Asus R9 280X Platinum Matrix Asus R9 280X Platinum Matrix Asus R9 280X Platinum Matrix

Not only the GPU, but also the memory, and the Vrms be meegekoeld. That is to say, a portion of the memory chips. In order that the heat pipes of the GPU come down to rate, enough space stores the black heat sink, which is located around the video card it, the four memory chips to the right of the GPU. That’s a shame because it could well have an adverse effect. On the overclocking capability It also remains unclear why Asus have taken to designing, then four of the eight memory chips do not carry. Cooling adapted for the entire video card worth The design is not new for the R9 280X, the same cooling was also already on the Matrix version of the HD 7970.

The performance of the cooler itself, we also found disappointing, but that problem was due to the particularly generous amount of thermal paste that was smeared on the GPU. At standard speed, we achieved under Furmark a temperature of 99 ° C, after which the GPU clocked back itself. After we had all the thermal grease from the heat sink is removed, we came up with a lot more acceptable temperatures from. For those who want to replace the standard cooling for your own copy, Asus provides an additional heatsink note that only cools the vrms. That leaves room for cooling memory and GPU with a custom air or water cooling kit.

Asus R9 280X Matrix Platinum

In addition to the cooling, the tension control of the matrix card adapted. The plus and minus voltage can be adjusted. The LEDs next to the buttons specifying how high the voltage is increased. Below the two buttons is a “safe-mode button and the top is a button that turn the fans on their maximum speed.
Overclocking

After removing the excessive amount of thermal paste, we could start with overclocking. We let the fans run at a hundred percent and we performed slowly GPU frequency, until the card is no longer correct response or artifacts REFLECT. Then we increased the tension and we looked at whether we could continue.

This eventually resulted in a maximum stable GPU frequency of 1240MHz at a voltage of 1294mV. The memory was still at 100MHz and thus tap a speed of 6800MHz GDDR5. The voltage for the GPU was much further up, but that turned out to. Nothing In case of more than 1240MHz, there appeared anyway artifacts. The question is whether 1240MHz pays off. Is the Matrix card by saving worth?
3DMark Fire Strike
Graphics cards In points, higher is better
R9 290x OC
*******
12266
R9 290 OC
*******
11653
R9 290x
******
11044
GTX Titan
******
10508
R9 290
******
10264
GTX 780
*****
9630
Asus Matrix R9 280X OC
*****
9355
R9 280X Matrix
*****
8770
GTX 770
****
7650
Unigine Heaven 4.0 – normal
Graphics cards In points, higher is better
R9 290x OC
*******
2603.00
R9 290 OC
*******
2477.00
R9 290x
******
2361.00
GTX 780
******
2251.00
R9 290
******
2235.00
Asus Matrix R9 280X OC
*****
1897.00
R9 280X Matrix
*****
1790.00
GTX 770
*****
1676.00

In 3DMark and Heaven leads the overclocking to higher scores, which still a little disappointing. The overclock of twelve percent on the GPU, we do not see non-linear reflected in the scores in Heaven and 3DMark, where we come from an increase of one percent or six.
Battlefield 3 – 2560×1440 – Ultra
Graphics cards Minimum / average frame rate in fps, higher is better
R9 290x OC
******
+
*
58.8 / 70.9
R9 290 OC
*****
+
*
50.8 / 64.7
R9 290x
*****
+
**
47.8 / 62.7
R9 290
****
+
*
46.3 / 58.0
Asus Matrix R9 280X OC
****
+
*
41,8 / 54,5
R9 280X Matrix
****
+
*
37.8 / 48.6
Crysis 3 – 2560×1440 – Very High
Graphics cards Minimum / average frame rate in fps, higher is better
R9 290x OC
*****
+
**
38.0 / 48.6
R9 290 OC
*****
+
*
35,7 / 45,1
R9 290x
*****
+
*
34.0 / 43.2
GTX Titan
*****
+
*
32.7 / 41.6
R9 290
****
+
*
31,7 / 40,6
GTX 780
****
+
*
29.3 / 37.9
Asus Matrix R9 280X OC
****
+
*
28.3 / 35.9
R9 280X Matrix
****
+
*
26,3 / 33,5
GTX 770
****
+
*
27.0 / 32.8

In Battlefield 3, the framerate goes there with twelve percent ahead. In Crysis 3, the difference remains at three percent. Thereby know the overclocked 280X otherwise no other video cards to make life miserable. The video card is faster with higher clock frequencies, but does not compare with the frame rates of a GTX 780 or R9 290 at default speeds.
Far Cry 3 – 2560×1440 – Ultra
Graphics cards Minimum / average frame rate in fps, higher is better
GTX Titan
******
+
*
42,0 / 47,2
R9 290x OC
******
+
*
38.3 / 46.7
GTX 780
******
+
*
38.0 / 43.8
R9 290x
*****
+
*
34.8 / 43.0
R9 290
*****
+
*
31,7 / 39,2
Asus Matrix R9 280X OC
****
+
**
25.7 / 35.5
GTX 770
****
+
*
30,7 / 35,0
R9 280X Matrix
***
+
**
23,3 / 34,4
Grid 2 – 2560×1440 – Ultra – 8xMSAA
Graphics cards Minimum / average frame rate in fps, higher is better
R9 290x OC
*****
+
**
74.3 / 93.4
R9 290 OC
*****
+
**
69.6 / 88.3
R9 290x
*****
+
*
64,1 / 81,9
GTX Titan
*****
+
*
64.4 / 78.1
R9 290
*****
+
*
61.8 / 77.6
GTX 780
*****
+
*
62.4 / 74.0
Asus Matrix R9 280X OC
****
+
*
55.5 / 71.8
R9 280X Matrix
****
+
*
53.5 / 67.0
GTX 770
***
+
*
46,7 / 59,7

Also from the benchmarks of Far Cry 3 and Grid 2 show that the overclocked 280X no expensive video cards catches. In the table of Far Cry 3 is the Matrix, although above the GTX 770, but that is because sorting by average frame rates. However, the minimum frame rate of the Matrix is ​​still much lower than that of the GTX 770.

Next page (noise, energy and heat – 8/10) Noise, energy and heat

It turns out that the results of the four video cards together hardly escape the benchmarks we used. Asus Matrix card is often the fastest and the MSI is always the slowest, but the differences are not large. Those looking for a 280X has probably already have an idea of ​​the performance, but the quality of the cooling and the associated noise are just as important. Therefore, we have the energy, and the noise and heat of these video cards measured.
Sound pressure – Idle 20cm
Graphics cards Sound pressure level in dB (A), lower is better
R9 MSI 280X
*****
32.3
R9 280X Gigabyte
******
34.6
R9 280X Matrix
******
35.5
R9 280X Club3D
*******
37.5

The noise level in idle state to mention. Well with all cards The 280X from Club3D produces more noise than the other three, but in a closed housing that difference will not be audible.
Sound Pressure – 20cm Load
Graphics cards Sound pressure level in dB (A), lower is better
R9 MSI 280X
*
35.6
R9 280X Matrix
*****
56.9
R9 280X Club3D
******
57.9
R9 280X Gigabyte
*******
61.0

Under full load with Furmark is MSI’s 280X at first glance very good test. Thanks to a fan speed of 27 percent, we arrived at a noise level of 35.6 dB (A). This is extremely low and the difference with the sound at idle is barely perceptible. Unfortunately extracts the MSI that noise by the GPU greatly clocks back. Occasionally popped the frequency to 500MHz, and then, after what seems to be cooled to jump to 900MHz or 1050MHz back. With this card, it is therefore advisable to manually control the fan speed that can frame drops occur in games. The other three cards to keep it tidy their fixed rate, but produce more noise at it logically. The 280X Gigabyte makes this the most noise. Also showed that the three fans running at 92 percent of their maximum speed in this test.
GPU temp – Furmark
Graphics cards Temperature in ° C, lower is better
R9 280X Gigabyte
******
74.0
R9 MSI 280X
******
77.0
R9 280X Club3D
******
79.0
R9 280X Matrix
*******
87.0

Deliver three fans at Gigabytes 280X with 74 º C or the lowest temperature. The maximum temperatures of the MSI and Gigabyte are also found incidentally fine. The Matrix card was, after we had removed the excessive thermal paste, 87 º C. Disappointing for a video card equipped with extra thick cooling.

We measure the sound pressure under load each time under the same conditions, on an open test bench, at an ambient temperature of 21 º C. In practice, however, each card is mounted in another enclosure, with the corresponding difference in airflow. Therefore, the results in the load test as an indication and are not fixed results.
Sound pressure – Fan 100%
Graphics cards Sound pressure level in dB (A), lower is better
R9 MSI 280X
*****
60.0
R9 280X Gigabyte
*****
61.6
R9 280X Club3D
******
62.4
R9 280X Matrix
*******
65.3

The only noise that is certain, is the noise at a fan speed of 100 percent. We mention that value to specify the number of noise can make, for example, in a housing having a poor airflow or in intensive tasks, such as the diamines of cryptocurrencies. The cooling up to a notion

If we are full crank the cooling we see that the MSI is the quietest, while the two large fans on the Matrix card produce the most noise. The Gigabyte graphics card produces little more noise than under the load test, but when the fan was almost at its maximum.
Consumption

In addition to the temperature and the noise, we have also measured the energy consumption of the system in different scenarios. The results of the Gigabyte card in this equation. Absence due to an error The video card should be returned quickly controlled and energy measurements are there then zeroed. The card is re-applied in the meantime and we expect the results of that card this week to add. We expect that the energy consumption will be compatible with that of the Club3D card, because of the corresponding clock speeds comparable.
Energy system – Idle
Graphics cards Power in watts, lower is better
R9 280X Club3D
******
81.00
R9 MSI 280X
******
82.90
R9 280X Matrix
*******
93,00

We have the idle consumption measured by starting the computer and shut off. Every possible extra software like Steam and Origin We waited until consumption had fallen to a constant value. So we came to two of the three video cards slightly above 80 watts out. Idle is the energy of the Matrix card is much higher than that of the rest.
Energy system – Ingame
Graphics cards Power in watts, lower is better
MSI 280X R9
******
343,00
R9 280X Club3D
*******
354.00
R9 280X Matrix
*******
371.20

For ingame consumption we let run Unigine Valley twenty minutes. Using our Voltcraft Energy Logger 3500 we calculated the average energy over that period out. The Valley test processor barely taxed, while the GPU can full the bin. Also in this test shows the Matrix-card to use the most energy.

Next page (gallery and specifications – 9/10) Photo Gallery and Specifications
R9 Radeon 280X R9 Radeon 280X R9 Radeon 280X R9 Radeon 280X R9 Radeon 280X R9 Radeon 280X R9 Radeon 280X R9 Radeon 280X R9 Radeon 280X R9 280X roundup MSI 280X R9 Gigabyte R9 280X
Specifications
Brand and Product Family Club3D Gigabyte MSI Asus Republic Of Gamers
Type R9 Radeon 280X royal king GV-R928XOC-3GD R9 280X Video 3G MATRIX R9280X-P-3GD5

Pricing and valuation
Price Unknown (1 shops) € 265.99 (6 stores) € 262.50 (6 stores) € 329, – (5 stores)
First prize entry Sunday, October 13th, 2013 Saturday, October 12, 2013 Wednesday, October 16, 2013 Saturday, October 12, 2013
Appreciation Score: 4 Rating: 4.5 Score: 0 Score: 0
Video Chip
Video Chip R9 Radeon 280X R9 Radeon 280X R9 Radeon 280X R9 Radeon 280X
Generation chipset Radeon R9 200 Series Radeon R9 200 Series Radeon R9 200 Series Radeon R9 200 Series
Video Chip Manufacturer AMD AMD AMD AMD
Normal speed video chip 1.05 GHz 1GHz 1GHz 1.1 GHz
Max Turbo Frequency 1.1 GHz 1.1 GHz 1.05 GHz
Computing Cores 2048 2048 2048 2048
Memory
Memory Size 3GB 3GB 3GB 3GB
Memory type (video card) GDDR5 GDDR5 GDDR5 GDDR5
Memory Speed 6GHz 6GHz 6GHz 6.4 GHz
Memory Bus Width 384bit 384bit 384bit 384bit
Interfaces
Interface Card (Video) PCI-E 3.0 x16 PCI-E 3.0 x16 PCI-E 3.0 x16 PCI-E 3.0 x16
Video out DVI-D, HDMI, 2x mini DisplayPort DVI-I, HDMI, 2x mini DisplayPort DVI-I, HDMI, 2x mini DisplayPort 4x DisplayPort, DVI-D, DVI-I, HDMI
DVI to D-Subadapter
Support
DirectX version 11.2 11.2 11.2 11.2
OpenGL version 4.3 4.3 4.3 4.3
Shader Model 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Dimensions
Length 268mm 285mm 269mm
Number of slots 2x 2x 2x 3x
Nutrition
Number of pins (video card) 6 pin, 8 pin 6 pin, 8 pin 6 pin, 8 pin 2x 8 pin
Number 6 pin 1x 1x 1x
Number 8 pin 1x 1x 1x 2x
Power Consumption 250W 300W
Remaining
Cooling Active cooling Active cooling Active cooling Active cooling
Link Interface ATi Crossfire ATi Crossfire ATi Crossfire ATi Crossfire
Sales Status Retail Retail Retail Retail
Factory Warranty 2 years carry in

Next page (Conclusion – 10/10) Conclusion

Of the four tested video cards there is a maverick: the Matrix Platinum version of Asus’ R9 280X. That video card should allow extreme overclocking thanks to the extra large cooler, manual voltage control and the ability to run. Fans with the push of a button at full power There’s a price attached to it and with a price of 330 euros, most people will first look at other cheaper 280X cards.

Those three cheaper video cards from Club3D, Gigabyte and MSI hardly avoid each other when it comes to performance in games. Although the differences are not large, the MSI does end always at the bottom of the list. This is obviously because the clock at 50MHz MSI is lower than the rest, but also the cooling would be a proportion of these low scores may have. During the sound test revealed that the MSI GPU is clocked back violently, while fans of the video card running at only 27 percent.
Radeon R9 280X

The cooling performance of the 280X Gigabyte we were not satisfactory. The fans were running during our Furmark test already at 92 percent, while simple fresh air can be drawn. In our test environment The advantage is that the temperature at the Gigabyte rises less high than the other video cards.

The 280X from Club3D, then that is the only video card in this quartet shows. No outliers He is fast, but not consistently the fastest. The cooling is not the quietest and the temperatures are not particularly low, but the cooling system does what it should do and ensures that the GPU is ticking under Furmark. Neatly 1100MHz Consumption falls between that of the Asus and MSI and is also pretty average. Not positive, but no negative outliers leads in this case to get the best score.

It is the Club3D so whether we would save through the Matrix card then quite overclockable? Those That would not be our choice, for two reasons. The overclocks that we get are not spectacular. A GPU frequency of 1240MHz is obviously wrong, but the huge cooler and the additional voltage regulation had higher expectations do add up. Moreover, the benchmarks that you have not come close to the frame rates with a 1240MHz R9 290 drop. And the video card costs, the cheapest version, a tenner more than the Matrix. Add to that the cooling of the Matrix card out of the box not even a Furmarksessie survived and we must conclude that the Matrix card fun toys, but does not offer the best value for money.

Score Card
MSI 280X R9 3G Video Asus Republic Of Gamers MATRIX R9280X-P-3GD5 Club3D Radeon R9 280X royal king Gigabyte GV-R928XOC-3GD
MSI R9 280X GAMING 3G Asus Republic Of Gamers MATRIX-R9280X-P-3GD5 Club3D Radeon R9 280X royalKing Gigabyte GV-R928XOC-3GD
Overall Rating Rating: 3 Rating: 3.5 Score: 4 Rating: 3.5

Viewing:-352

Tags:

In: Technology & Gadgets Asked By: [17584 Red Star Level]

Answer this Question

You must be Logged In to post an Answer.

Not a member yet? Sign Up Now »