Radeon 780M vs R9 390

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 390 and Radeon 780M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

R9 390
2015, $329
0 MB GDDR5, 275 Watt
20.95
+29.8%

R9 390 outperforms 780M by a substantial 30% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking313373
Place by popularitynot in top-10045
Cost-effectiveness evaluation10.09no data
Power efficiency5.9283.58
ArchitectureGCN 2.0 (2013−2017)RDNA 3.0 (2022−2026)
GPU code nameGrenadaPhoenix
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Designreferenceno data
Release date18 June 2015 (11 years ago)31 January 2024 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$329 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores2560768
Core clock speedno data800 MHz
Boost clock speed1000 MHz2900 MHz
Number of transistors6,200 million25,390 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm4 nm
Power consumption (TDP)275 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate160.0139.2
Floating-point processing power5.12 TFLOPS8.909 TFLOPS
ROPs6432
TMUs16048
Ray Tracing Coresno data12
L0 Cacheno data192 KB
L1 Cache640 KB256 KB
L2 Cache1024 KB2 MB

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Bus supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x8
Length275 mmno data
Width2-slotIGP
Supplementary power connectors1 x 6-pin, 1 x 8-pinNone
Bridgeless CrossFire+-

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeGDDR5System Shared
High bandwidth memory (HBM)-no data
Maximum RAM amount0 MBSystem Shared
Memory bus width512 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1000 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth384 GB/sno data
Shared memory-+

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPortMotherboard Dependent
Eyefinity+-
Number of Eyefinity displays6no data
HDMI+-
DisplayPort support+-

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

CrossFire+-
FreeSync+-
PowerTune+-
TrueAudio+-
VCE+-
DDMA audio+no data

API and SDK support

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectXDirectX® 1212 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.36.8
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.02.1
Vulkan+1.3
Mantle+-

Synthetic benchmarks

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score.

R9 390 20.95
+29.8%
Radeon 780M 16.14

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

R9 390 8745
+29.8%
Samples: 3451
Radeon 780M 6737
Samples: 12568

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

R9 390 12730
+59.4%
Radeon 780M 7985

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD45−50
+28.6%
35
1440p30−35
+25%
24
4K18−20
+28.6%
14

Cost per frame, $

1080p7.31no data
1440p10.97no data
4K18.28no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Atomic Heart 49 49
Counter-Strike 2 119 119
Cyberpunk 2077 39 39
Resident Evil 4 Remake 25 25

Full HD
Medium

Atomic Heart 39 39
Battlefield 5 70−75 70−75
Counter-Strike 2 82 82
Cyberpunk 2077 31 31
Far Cry 5 45 45
Fortnite 90−95 90−95
Forza Horizon 4 65−70 65−70
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 60−65 60−65
Valorant 116 116

Full HD
High

Atomic Heart 23 23
Battlefield 5 70−75 70−75
Counter-Strike 2 39 39
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 210−220 210−220
Cyberpunk 2077 24 24
Dota 2 100−105 100−105
Far Cry 5 41 41
Fortnite 90−95 90−95
Forza Horizon 4 65−70 65−70
Grand Theft Auto V 44 44
Metro Exodus 29 29
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 60−65 60−65
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 47 47
Valorant 103 103

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 70−75 70−75
Cyberpunk 2077 23 23
Dota 2 100−105 100−105
Far Cry 5 39 39
Forza Horizon 4 65−70 65−70
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 60−65 60−65
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 29 29
Valorant 120−130 120−130

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 90−95 90−95

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 27 27
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 120−130 120−130
Grand Theft Auto V 18 18
Metro Exodus 21−24 21−24
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 150−160 150−160
Valorant 79 79

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 45−50 45−50
Cyberpunk 2077 16 16
Far Cry 5 27 27
Forza Horizon 4 40−45 40−45
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 20 20

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 35−40 35−40

4K
High

Atomic Heart 12−14 12−14
Counter-Strike 2 6 6
Grand Theft Auto V 21 21
Metro Exodus 12−14 12−14
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 15 15
Valorant 43 43

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 24−27 24−27
Counter-Strike 2 12−14 12−14
Cyberpunk 2077 6 6
Dota 2 55−60 55−60
Far Cry 5 12 12
Forza Horizon 4 27−30 27−30
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18 16−18

4K
Epic

Fortnite 16−18 16−18

This is how R9 390 and Radeon 780M compete in popular games:

  • R9 390 is 29% faster in 1080p
  • R9 390 is 25% faster in 1440p
  • R9 390 is 29% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 62 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 20.95 16.14
Recency 18 June 2015 31 January 2024
Chip lithography 28 nm 4 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 275 Watt 15 Watt

R9 390 has a 30% higher aggregate performance score.

Radeon 780M, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 8 years, a 86% more advanced lithography process, and 95% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R9 390 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon 780M in performance tests.

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


4.2 676 votes

Rate Radeon R9 390 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2 2740 votes

Rate Radeon 780M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R9 390 or Radeon 780M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.