AMD
Radeon RX 5500 XT vs Radeon R9 280
Full comparison of specs, performance and benchmarks
AMD
R9 280
Aggregate performance score
We've compared RX 5500 XT and R9 280 across specs and all relevant benchmarks.
↗RX 5500 XT outperforms R9 280 by ~8% on the catalog index; this is not a measured FPS gain.+8%
Scores are normalized on the Head to Head scale. Higher is better. How is this calculated?H2HBench Data Quality
Low confidenceSpecifications: Field verification not recordedVerified gaming results: 0Estimated / unverified results: 32Price record updated: Sep 6, 2026
Limited verified data
H2HBench Verdict
Higher catalog score: Radeon RX 5500 XT (~21%)
The score difference is not a measured FPS improvement.
Reasons to consider RX 5500 XT
- Higher catalog performance index
- More graphics memory
- Lower stated power consumption
- Recorded feature support: OpenCL 2.1 · FSR
Reasons to consider R9 280
- Lower recorded market price
- Recorded feature support: OpenCL 1.2 · Not supported
Catalog metrics radar
Axes with missing data are hidden; every value uses a fixed scale.
AMDPerformance
Efficiency
Price / performance
Memory capacity
3936
10060
100100
6856
Graphics card ranking
Positions 92–97of 321
Which should you choose?
Two practical conclusions based on community votes and gaming value.
Radeon R9 280
137 likesHead to Head visitors currently choose this model more often.
Radeon R9 280
Price $37.00Based on catalog performance per unit of current market price, not measured FPS.
Overview
Scores are calculated from specifications, performance, and efficiency.
GamesDirectX, OpenCL, and Vulkan performance
39Better
36
Professional applications3D modeling, video editing, and rendering
34Better
32
AI and machine learningMachine-learning and AI capabilities
32Better
30
Power efficiencyPower consumption across workloads
100Better
60
Head to Head scoreOverall catalog score
57Better
47
Specifications
The better numeric value is highlighted in green, taking the metric direction into account.
DisplayPort
HDMI
Device class
Upscaling
DirectX
Vulkan
OpenGL
TFLOPSBetter
Power consumptionBetter
Memory type
Power connector
Release date
Architecture
Thickness
Compute API
Launch priceBetter
Shader units / coresBetter
Clock speedBetter
Base clockBetter
Boost clockBetter
VRAMBetter
Memory frequencyBetter
Memory busBetter
Memory bandwidthBetter
Interface
Power consumptionBetter
Process nodeBetter
Recommended PSUBetter
LengthBetter
Die sizeBetter
Memory cacheBetter
Transistor countBetter
Max monitors
Max resolution
USB Type-C
Gaming FPS
Available results are shown separately; missing data is not treated as zero.
The Gaming FPS section compares RX 5500 XT and R9 280 across curated H2H Lab game presets. The useful signal is not only average FPS, but also how each device behaves at 1440p and 4K, how memory capacity and bus width affect heavy textures, and whether the game engine favors raster performance, ray tracing, or driver maturity.
RX 5500 XTR9 280
Verified externalEstimatedSources ↗
Counter-Strike 2
1080p High
190 FPS
179 FPS
1080p Ultra
133 FPS
126 FPS
1440p Ultra
89 FPS
72 FPS
4K Ultra
26 FPS
24 FPS
Counter-Strike 2RX 5500 XT190 FPSR9 280179 FPSRX 5500 XT133 FPSR9 280126 FPSRX 5500 XT89 FPSR9 28072 FPSRX 5500 XT26 FPSR9 28024 FPS
Cyberpunk 2077RX 5500 XT122 FPSR9 280115 FPSRX 5500 XT105 FPSR9 28099 FPSRX 5500 XT64 FPSR9 28052 FPSRX 5500 XT17 FPSR9 28016 FPS
Forza Horizon 5RX 5500 XT154 FPSR9 280146 FPSRX 5500 XT100 FPSR9 28094 FPSRX 5500 XT80 FPSR9 28064 FPSRX 5500 XT38 FPSR9 28036 FPS
Hogwarts LegacyRX 5500 XT100 FPSR9 28094 FPSRX 5500 XT84 FPSR9 28079 FPSRX 5500 XT58 FPSR9 28046 FPSRX 5500 XT18 FPSR9 28017 FPS
H2H workload indices
Comparable internal indices on a fixed 0–100 scale.
H2H Raster IndexH2H Index / 10039368%
H2H Compute IndexH2H Index / 100473821%
H2H Rendering IndexH2H Index / 100474211%
H2H Memory Workload IndexH2H Index / 100685619%
H2H Efficiency IndexH2H Index / 1001006050%
These are versioned H2H calculated indices derived from normalized catalog data. They are not results from a third-party benchmark.
H2H AI workload indices
Estimated workload profiles based on available performance and memory data.
H2H Image Generation IndexH2H Index / 100524514%
H2H ML Training IndexH2H Index / 100514415%
H2H Inference IndexH2H Index / 100474211%
H2H Local LLM IndexH2H Index / 100554716%
H2H Computer Vision IndexH2H Index / 100484213%
These are versioned H2H calculated indices derived from normalized catalog data. They are not results from a third-party benchmark.
Graphics APIs, SDKs and upscaling
DirectX12.111.1
Vulkan1.41.2
OpenGL4.64.6
UpscalingFSRNot supported
Compute APIOpenCL 2.1OpenCL 1.2
Architecture and release
ArchitectureRDNA 1.0GCN 1.0
Process node7 nmBetter28 nm
Release date20192014
Device classDesktopDesktop
GPU cores, die and clocks
Transistor count6400 millionBetter4313 million
Die size158 mm²Better352 mm²
Shader units / cores14081792Better
Base clock1607 MHzBetter827 MHz
Boost clock1845 MHzBetter933 MHz
Board size, power and compatibility
InterfacePCIe 4x8PCIe 3x16
Length180 mmBetter275 mm
ThicknessDual-slotDual-slot
Recommended PSU300 WBetter550 W
Power connector8 pin6+8 pin
Display outputs and limits
HDMIHDMI 2.0bHDMI 1.4a
DisplayPortDisplayPort 1.4aDisplayPort 1.2
USB Type-CNoNo
Max monitors44
Max resolution7680 × 43204096 × 2160
Memory and compute throughput
VRAM8 GB GDDR6Better3 GB GDDR5
Memory typeGDDR6GDDR5
Memory bus128 bit384 bitBetter
TFLOPS5.196Better3.344
Other comparisons
GTX 1660NVIDIAReviews and questions
Explain this comparison
Beyond percentages: causes, relevant specifications, and practical impact behind every chart.
What AI will explain
Overall score, radar, FPS, synthetic tests, specifications, efficiency, and value.
Evidence details
Data coverage
- Verified gaming results
- 0
- Verified synthetic results
- 0
- Games with verified results
- 0
- Verified community results
- 0
- Estimated / unverified results
- 32
- Specifications
- 0 / 70
Calculated scores · How is this calculated?
Scores use the catalog model and may include estimated inputs. Open each score to see its origin and the methodology.
clamp(round(performance × 0.7 + (efficiency ?? 50) × 0.2 + (value is missing ? 0 : (value − 50) × 0.2)), 0, 100)Price evidence · View sources (6)
Verified community results
No verified community benchmarks yet.
Reviewed by
No individual editorial review is recorded for this comparison.
Comparison history
Show recorded changes (4)
- · Record updated: products
- · Record updated: products
- · Record updated: products
- · Record updated: products
Why you can trust this comparison
Origin and confidence are evaluated from the evidence attached to each value. Unverified results are identified, and specification, benchmark and price dates remain separate.
Owner experiences
Real builds, results, and community feedback.
Moderator reviewedHelpful to the communityExpert badges
Frequently asked comparison questions
Short recommendations based on performance, memory, power consumption, and intended use.
01Which is better for gaming: RX 5500 XT or R9 280?+
RX 5500 XT has the higher overall gaming score, while RX 5500 XT offers the better price-to-performance ratio. The final choice depends on resolution and settings.
02Which is better for streaming?+
RX 5500 XT is the stronger streaming choice thanks to performance, hardware encoding, and application support. Check AV1, H.264, and HEVC support before buying.
03Which is better for Blender?+
RX 5500 XT is generally the better option for Blender and GPU rendering. Rendering-engine support and available VRAM also matter.
04Which is better for video editing?+
RX 5500 XT offers more overall performance, while RX 5500 XT offers more memory headroom. Codecs, hardware encoders, and editor optimization can change the result.
05Which is better for neural networks and AI?+
RX 5500 XT is the more practical option for local AI workloads. VRAM capacity, compute libraries, and framework compatibility are especially important.
06Which is better for 1080p?+
RX 5500 XT is the most rational 1080p choice, where high frame rates and cost per frame matter most.
07Which is better for 1440p?+
RX 5500 XT leads in combined 1440p performance. RX 5500 XT can be preferable for heavy textures and games with high VRAM usage.
08Which is better for 4K?+
RX 5500 XT is preferable for 4K, where total performance, memory bandwidth, and VRAM capacity have the greatest impact.
09Which is better for a quiet PC?+
RX 5500 XT is easier to use in a quiet build because of its lower estimated power and thermal load. Actual noise depends on the specific cooler.
10Which is better without replacing the power supply?+
RX 5500 XT is the safer candidate because its stated power consumption is lower. Verify PSU wattage, age, and power connectors.
11Is it worth upgrading from the previous generation?+
Consider upgrading to RX 5500 XT if your current device no longer delivers the required FPS, memory capacity, or feature support. A gain below 15–20% is usually worth waiting for a price cut.