Radeon R9 280X vs RTX A400

G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.

Radeon R9 280X vs RTX A400 FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with Ryzen 7 9800X3D to isolate GPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

Radeon R9 280X vs RTX A400: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each GPU makes more sense in practice: raw FPS, VRAM, features, power draw, pricing, and long-term headroom.

Radeon R9 280X

2013

Why buy it

✅89.1% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.

Trade-offs

❌Less VRAM, with 3 GB vs 4 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
❌2013 hardware with 3 GB of VRAM already sits in legacy territory for modern games.
❌
121.5% HIGHER MSRP
$299 MSRPvs$135 MSRP
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 20.4 vs 44.3 G3D/$ ($299 MSRP vs $135 MSRP).
❌300% higher power demand at 200W vs 50W.

RTX A400

2024

Why buy it

✅Costs $164 less on MSRP ($135 MSRP vs $299 MSRP).
✅Delivers 117.2% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 44.3 vs 20.4 G3D/$ ($135 MSRP vs $299 MSRP).
✅33.3% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (4 GB vs 3 GB).
✅Better long-term bet: Ampere (2020−2025) on 8nm gives it a newer hardware base for upcoming games.
✅Draws 50W instead of 200W, a 150W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower average FPS than Radeon R9 280X across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.

Quick Answers

Which GPU is faster for gaming right now?

Radeon R9 280X is the faster gaming card right now. In our data, it leads by 89.1% in average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data and by 2% in PassMark G3D (6,100 vs 5,983), so the answer here is pretty clean.

Which GPU is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond?

RTX A400 is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond. The case is simple: 4 GB vs 3 GB of VRAM, a 8nm process instead of 28nm, 6 vs 0 ray-tracing units, and a newer 2024 generation instead of 2013. That gives it more room for heavier textures and higher settings over time.

Which GPU is the better buy today?

RTX A400 makes the most sense to buy today. It is $164 cheaper on MSRP at $135 vs $299, and it leads G3D-per-dollar by 117.2% (44.3 vs 20.4), which is enough to swing the recommendation its way. Radeon R9 280X still makes more sense if max raw gaming performance matters more than value.

Radeon R9 280X vs RTX A400 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Radeon R9 280X

The Radeon R9 280X is manufactured by AMD. It was released in October 8 2013. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The boost clock speed is 1000 MHz. It has 2048 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 200W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6,100 points. Launch price was $299.

RTX A400

The RTX A400 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in April 16 2024. It features the Ampere architecture. The core clock ranges from 727 MHz to 1762 MHz. It has 768 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 8 nm process technology. It features 6 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 5,983 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The Radeon R9 280X scores 6,100 and the RTX A400 reaches 5,983 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon R9 280X is built on GCN 1.0 while the RTX A400 uses Ampere, both on 28 nm vs 8 nm. Shader units: 2,048 (Radeon R9 280X) vs 768 (RTX A400). Raw compute: 4.096 TFLOPS (Radeon R9 280X) vs 2.706 TFLOPS (RTX A400). Boost clocks: 1000 MHz vs 1762 MHz.

Feature	Radeon R9 280X	RTX A400
G3D Mark Score	6,100+2%	5,983
Architecture	GCN 1.0	Ampere
Process Node	28 nm	8 nm
Shading Units	2048+167%	768
Compute (TFLOPS)	4.096 TFLOPS+51%	2.706 TFLOPS
Boost Clock	1000 MHz	1762 MHz+76%
ROPs	32+100%	16
TMUs	128+433%	24

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

The RTX A400 gets NVIDIA DLSS, which still tends to look cleaner in motion. The Radeon R9 280X leans on FSR, which is flexible and widely supported, but usually a bit rougher at the same settings.

Feature	Radeon R9 280X	RTX A400
Upscaling Tech	FSR Upscaling / FSR 4	Upscaling support
Frame Generation	Not Supported	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	AMD Anti-Lag	NVIDIA Reflex

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The Radeon R9 280X has 3 GB of VRAM, while the RTX A400 carries 4 GB. RTX A400 gives you 33.3% more memory capacity, which matters more once you move into heavier textures, mods, or higher resolutions. Memory bus width is 384-bit on the Radeon R9 280X and 128-bit on the RTX A400.

Feature	Radeon R9 280X	RTX A400
VRAM Capacity	3 GB	4 GB+33%
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR6
Bus Width	384-bit+200%	128-bit

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The Radeon R9 280X draws 200W versus the RTX A400's 50W — a 120% difference. The RTX A400 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 500W (Radeon R9 280X) vs 350W (RTX A400). Power connectors: 6-pin + 8-pin vs PCIe-powered.

Feature	Radeon R9 280X	RTX A400
TDP	200W	50W-75%
Recommended PSU	500W	350W-30%
Power Connector	6-pin + 8-pin	PCIe-powered
Slots	2	—
Temp (Load)	75°C	—
Perf/Watt	30.5	119.7+292%

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Radeon R9 280X came in at $299, while the RTX A400 launched at $135. On MSRP, RTX A400 was 54.8% cheaper ($164 less). Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 20.4 (Radeon R9 280X) vs 44.3 (RTX A400) — the RTX A400 offers 117.2% better value. The newer card here is RTX A400 (2024 vs 2013).

Feature	Radeon R9 280X	RTX A400
MSRP	$299	$135-55%
Performance per Dollar	20.4	44.3+117%
Codename	Tahiti	GA107
Release	October 8 2013	April 16 2024
Ranking	#404	#397

Search Radeon R9 280X on Amazon

Search RTX A400 on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.