Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Sapphire's Dual-X R9 280 OC Graphics Card Review
By ,
1. Sapphire's Radeon R9 280: Still Competitive

AMD just announced its Radeon R9 285. Based on specifications, this upcoming graphics card has raw performance similar to the Radeon R9 280 it is likely to replace, at the same $250 price point. But before the R9 285 arrives, we'd like to take stock of where the Radeon R9 280 sits in the current scheme of things, and specifically what Sapphire's Dual-X OC brings to the table.

AMD has a rich history of iterating its Tahiti GPU in the 1792-shader configuration, from the 800 MHz Radeon HD 7950 to the 933 MHz (peak) Radeon R9 280. Of course, all of those cards use 1250 MHz (5 GT/s effective) GDDR5 memory. The upcoming Radeon R9 285 marks the first bump in memory clock for this class of AMD card at 1375 MHz (5.5 GT/s effective, the same as the Radeon HD 7970), but this is more than offset by a thinner 256-bit memory interface, and its maximum GPU boost clock rate drops slightly to 918 MHz.

With a 940 MHz peak frequency, Sapphire's Dual-X R9 280 OC has the highest GPU clock rate of any of these options, although it beats the reference Radeon R9 280 by a mere 7 MHz. That doesn't sound like much, but keep in mind that the real-world clock rate is limited by temperature. Sapphire's real strength isn't the overclock; what matters is whether or not the Dual-X cooler has the ability to control the thermal ceiling in order to keep the GPU running at the highest possible frequency for as long as possible.

Sapphire's Dual-X R9 280 OC sports the unique Dual-X cooler with a black-on-gray theme, attached to the company's namesake-colored PCB. That board measures 10.25" x 3.89" and weighs 1 lb 10 oz, making it slightly smaller and significantly lighter than AMD's reference Radeon HD 7950 Boost card at 10.5" x 3.89" and 2 lbs.

This particular product's graphics processor is rated for 850 MHz base, with a boost state of 940 MHz, and 1250 MHz GDDR5 memory. The amount of memory used on Tahiti-based boards is at least generous 3 GB, and the Dual-X is no exception.

The aluminum heatsink features four beefy 8 mm copper pipes, cooled by two 85 mm low-profile fans. The card's 250 W TDP requires two six-pin auxiliary power connectors.

Note the two CrossFire connectors on the right, allowing as many as four cards to render cooperatively. A Dual BIOS switch allows the user to select either legacy or UEFI compatibility modes. As an added bonus, it also provides a measure of safety for those who like to tweak their cards with a ROM flash.

The Dual-X R9 280 is equipped with a DVI-I, DVI-D, full-sized DisplayPort, and full-sized HDMI output.

The package includes a CrossFire bridge, a six-foot HDMI cable, two Molex-to-six-pin PCIe power adapters, manual, registration card, driver CD, and case sticker.

Now that we're familiar with the product, let's see how it performs.

2. How We Tested Sapphire's Dual-X R9 280 OC

In this single-product review, we'd like to focus on how Sapphire's Dual-X R9 280 OC fares against its predecessor, the Radeon HD 7950 Boost reference card, and Nvidia's similarly-priced competition, the GeForce GTX 760.

Two of the games we're testing have an option to use a Mantle code path, so we're running those benchmarks (Thief and Battlefield 4) with Mantle enabled and disabled to measure the API's impact.

Graphics cards like the Radeon R9 280 require a substantial amount of power, so XFX sent us its PRO850W 80 PLUS Bronze-certified power supply. This modular PSU employs a single +12 V rail rated for 70 A. XFX claims continuous (not peak) output of up to 850 W at 50 degrees Celsius.

We've almost exclusively eliminated mechanical disks in the lab, preferring solid-state storage for alleviating I/O-related bottlenecks. Samsung sent all of our labs 256 GB 840 Pros, so we standardize on these exceptional SSDs.


Test System
CPU
Intel Core i7-3960X (Sandy Bridge-E), 3.3 GHz, Six Cores, LGA 2011, 15 MB Shared L3 Cache, Hyper-Threading enabled.
Motherboard
ASRock X79 Extreme9 (LGA 2011) Chipset: Intel X79 Express
Networking
On-Board Gigabit LAN controller
Memory
Corsair Vengeance LP PC3-16000, 4 x 4 GB, 1600 MT/s, CL 8-8-8-24-2T
Graphics
Sapphire Dual-X R9 280 OC
850/940 MHz GPU, 3 GB GDDR5 at 1250 MHz (5000 MT/s)

Reference AMD Radeon HD 7950 Boost

850/925 MHz GPU, 3 GB GDDR5 at 1255 MHz (5000 MT/s)

Nvidia GeForce GTX 760
980/1033 MHz GPU, 2 GB GDDR5 at 1502 MHz (5008 MT/s)
SSD
Samsung 840 Pro, 256 GB SSD, SATA 6Gb/s
Power
XFX PRO850W, ATX12V, EPS12V
Software and Drivers
Operating System
Microsoft Windows 8 Pro x64
DirectX
DirectX 11
Graphics Drivers
AMD Catalyst14.7 RC 1
Nvidia 340.52 WHQL
Benchmarks
Watch Dogs
Version 1.04.497, Custom THG Benchmark, 90-second Fraps run, Driving
Arma 3
V. 1.26.126.789, 30-sec. Fraps "Infantry Showcase"
Battlefield 4
Version 1.3.2.3825, Custom THG Benchmark, 90-Sec
Assassin's Creed IV: Black Flag
Custom THG Benchmark, 40-Sec
ThiefVersion 1.6.0.0, Built-in Benchmark
TitanfallVersion 1.0.5.7, Demeter Map, Custom THG Benchmark

3. Game Benchmarks

Watch Dogs

We begin our benchmarks with Watch Dogs. As you already know, its developers stand accused of handicapping the potential graphics quality of the PC version to maintain parity with consoles. Regardless, it's a fun game with attractive visuals that definitely exploit available GPU horsepower.

At the high detail preset, Sapphire's Dual-X R9 280 has a slight advantage over the competition. The GeForce GTX 760 fares better in our frame time variance measurement, but all of the cards display an acceptable result with few spikes at or above 15 milliseconds. We didn't notice any particularly smooth or laggy products during our tests.

Arma 3

Arma 3 is a brutally realistic combat simulator, and it's also taxing on the PC.

The results are quite close, but Sapphire's Dual-X 280 manages a slight advantage in both frame rate and frame time variance over the GeForce GTX 760 and Radeon HD 7950 Boost.

Battlefield 4

The Battlefield 4 benchmark gives us an opportunity to turn on AMD's Mantle graphics API and see if the company has made any improvements compared to DirectX since we last checked.

The Mantle rendering option does grant the Radeon cards a miniscule boost in FPS, but nothing to boast about. The results are extremely close across the board, though Sapphire's card once again garners an insignificant win.

Battlefield 4 is known for low frame time variance, and these tests do nothing to dispel that expectation.

Assassin's Creed IV: Black Flag

Assassin's Creed IV: Black Flag is another game that demands a great deal from PC hardware in exchange for beautiful graphics. Will any of these competing graphics cards be able to separate themselves from the pack?

Not really. It is almost as though the Radeon 7950 Boost, R9 280, and GeForce GTX 760 were designed to deliver extremely close performance in the benchmarks we picked.

Thief

Thief is known to demonstrate significant advantages for Radeon cards when the Mantle API is enabled, so lets see if the GeForce is able to keep up.

It's no surprise that Nvidia's GeForce GTX 760 is behind the pack in this title, but it still presents a playable result. The Radeons enjoy a smoother frame rate, however, and never drop below 30 FPS. The Mantle API does add a couple of frames per second to the minimum and average performance numbers.

The average frame latency is low across all three cards. We see some GeForce spikes in the sample, but that evens out with the Radeon cards over time according to the average and percentile data.

Titanfall

Titanfall is a difficult game to benchmark in a consistent manner; the only way to select a specific map is via a private multiplayer match, which is incompatible with Fraps due to the game's dependance on EA Origin's overlay. Our benchmark therefore consists of standing in place and looking at a demanding part of the Demeter map.

The results are very close, so once again there's not too much to discuss.

4. Power, Temperature, And Frequency Benchmarks

Now let's take a look at Sapphire's Dual-X R9 280 OC versus a reference Radeon HD 7950 Boost card. From a technical standpoint, Sapphire's only advantage is a 15 MHz difference in the maximum GPU clock rate, helped along by a 25 W-higher TDP limit. That doesn't sound like much , but the combination of a higher thermal limit and a better aftermarket cooler should ensure that Sapphire's card remains in its highest boost state longer than AMD's reference card. Let's see what happens during the BioShock Infinite benchmark:

There you have it. The Radeon HD 7950 Boost drops its clock rate much more often than Sapphire's Dual-X 280. How does the power usage look over the same benchmark?

By the end of the test, there's about a 40 W difference in power draw at times, which is more than the specifications would have us expect. Now, lets examine how this correlates with GPU temperature:

Sapphire's Dual-X employs an aftermarket cooler to keep the GPU temperature lower than the reference card, while using more power and maintaining the peak frequency for longer periods in the process. Were Sapphire's card outfitted with a less-effective reference cooler, we believe performance would be much closer to the Radeon HD 7950 Boost. 

5. Sapphire's Dual-X R9 280: A Solid Option At A Good Price

With the individual benchmarks behind us, let's consider average performance across those tests. The following chart is based on our DirectX-based results, and does not take Mantle into account.

Its no surprise that the Dual-X cooler allows the R9 280 to stay at its slightly-overclocked state longer than a reference Radeon HD 7950 Boost. On average, that gives Sapphire's card more of a lead against the GeForce GTX 760 in the benchmarks we ran. Other games might show Nvidia's card in a more favorable light, but we do think that these cards are generally on par. Sapphire's Dual-X R9 280 tends to take a slight lead in most titles. In the real world, however, that'd be difficult to notice.

The decision between AMD's Radeon R9 280 and Nvidia's GeForce GTX 760 comes down to features and price, as it has since these two cards were introduced. Folks will favor the Radeon when Mantle, Raptr, or cryptocurrency mining are factors, and the GeForce if CUDA, PhysX, 3D Vision, or GeForce Experience (and its related features) come into play. But it's such a close race that I don't think an enthusiast can go wrong in the $250 range for either a Radeon R9 280X or GeForce GTX 760 with a nice aftermarket cooler.

Having said that, a quick check on Newegg shows that Sapphihre's Dual-X R9 280 is currently on sale for $220 (and $200 with rebate), making it hard to find fault with this graphics card from a value standpoint. It was more than capable of running every game we threw at it, even using demanding detail settings and high resolutions, with averageframe rates that never dropped below 30.

True, we're on the cusp of the introduction of AMD's Radeon R9 285. But performance should be competitive with (if not slightly superior to) the Radeon R9 280, judging from the specifications. Rumors abound that Nvidia might have new products on the horizon too, and they might change our outlook in the near future. Still, none of these potential changes in the market take too much away from the value prospect of Sapphire's Dual-X R9 280 at its current price.