Radeon R9 M390 vs FirePro W7170M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
W4170M W4190M W5130M W5170M W6150M W6170M W7170M
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
M390 M390 Mac Edition M390X M395 M395 Mac Edition M395X M395X Mac Edition

Aggregate performance score

We've compared FirePro W7170M with Radeon R9 M390, including specs and performance data.

W7170M
2015
4 GB GDDR5, 100 Watt
8.83

R9 M390 outperforms W7170M by a minimal 2% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Share:
W7170M W7170M
R9 M390 R9 M390

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking528524
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency6.79no data
ArchitectureGCN 3.0 (2014−2019)GCN (2012−2015)
GPU code nameAmethystPitcairn
Market segmentMobile workstationLaptop
Release date2 October 2015 (10 years ago)9 June 2015 (10 years ago)

Detailed specifications

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

Pipelines / CUDA cores20481024
Core clock speed723 MHzno data
Number of transistors5,000 million5000 Million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)100 Wattno data
Texture fill rate92.54no data
Floating-point processing power2.961 TFLOPSno data
ROPs32no data
TMUs128no data
L1 Cache512 KBno data
L2 Cache512 KBno data

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).

Laptop sizelargelarge
Bus supportno dataPCIe 3.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16no data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data

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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount4 GB2 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1250 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth160.0 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 ConnectorsNo outputsno data
Eyefinity++

Supported technologies

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

AppAcceleration+-
FreeSync-+
HD3D-+
PowerTune-+
DualGraphics-+
ZeroCore-+
Switchable graphics-+

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (12_0)DirectX® 12
Shader Model6.3no data
OpenGL4.64.4
OpenCL2.0Not Listed
Vulkan1.2.131-
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.

W7170M 8.83
R9 M390 9.00
+1.9%

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

W7170M 9708
+42.4%
R9 M390 6819

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 HD52
+20.9%
43
−20.9%
4K18−20
−11.1%
20
+11.1%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 45−50
−2.1%
45−50
+2.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
−5.6%
18−20
+5.6%
Hogwarts Legacy 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 35−40
−2.6%
40−45
+2.6%
Counter-Strike 2 45−50
−2.1%
45−50
+2.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
−5.6%
18−20
+5.6%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Fortnite 50−55
−1.9%
55−60
+1.9%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
−2.6%
40−45
+2.6%
Forza Horizon 5 27−30
−3.7%
27−30
+3.7%
Hogwarts Legacy 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
−3.1%
30−35
+3.1%
Valorant 85−90
−1.1%
85−90
+1.1%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 35−40
−2.6%
40−45
+2.6%
Counter-Strike 2 45−50
−2.1%
45−50
+2.1%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 130−140
−2.2%
140−150
+2.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
−5.6%
18−20
+5.6%
Dota 2 65−70
−1.5%
65−70
+1.5%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Fortnite 50−55
−1.9%
55−60
+1.9%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
−2.6%
40−45
+2.6%
Forza Horizon 5 27−30
−3.7%
27−30
+3.7%
Grand Theft Auto V 30−35
−3%
34
+3%
Hogwarts Legacy 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Metro Exodus 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
−3.1%
30−35
+3.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 31
+0%
31
+0%
Valorant 85−90
−1.1%
85−90
+1.1%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 35−40
−2.6%
40−45
+2.6%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
−5.6%
18−20
+5.6%
Dota 2 65−70
−1.5%
65−70
+1.5%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
−2.6%
40−45
+2.6%
Hogwarts Legacy 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
−3.1%
30−35
+3.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 23
+27.8%
18
−27.8%
Valorant 85−90
−1.1%
85−90
+1.1%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 50−55
−1.9%
55−60
+1.9%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 65−70
−2.9%
70−75
+2.9%
Grand Theft Auto V 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Metro Exodus 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
−2.1%
45−50
+2.1%
Valorant 100−105
−1%
100−110
+1%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 21−24
−4.8%
21−24
+4.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
−4.8%
21−24
+4.8%
Hogwarts Legacy 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
−8.3%
12−14
+8.3%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Metro Exodus 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
−33.3%
12
+33.3%
Valorant 45−50
−2.1%
45−50
+2.1%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 10−11
−10%
10−12
+10%
Counter-Strike 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Dota 2 30−35
−3%
30−35
+3%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

This is how W7170M and R9 M390 compete in popular games:

  • W7170M is 21% faster in 1080p
  • R9 M390 is 11% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the W7170M is 28% faster.
  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the R9 M390 is 33% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • W7170M performs better in 1 test (2%)
  • R9 M390 performs better in 39 tests (59%)
  • there's a draw in 26 tests (39%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 8.83 9.00
Recency 2 October 2015 9 June 2015
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 2 GB

W7170M has an age advantage of 3 months, and a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

R9 M390, on the other hand, has a 1.9% higher aggregate performance score.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between FirePro W7170M and Radeon R9 M390.

Be aware that FirePro W7170M is a mobile workstation graphics card while Radeon R9 M390 is a mobile workstation one.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.

AMD FirePro W7170M
FirePro W7170M
AMD Radeon R9 M390
Radeon R9 M390
Like
Like

Other comparisons

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

W7170M FirePro W7170M
vs
Quadro P620 Quadro P620
R9 M390 Radeon R9 M390
vs
GTX 680MX GeForce GTX 680MX
W7170M FirePro W7170M
vs
K2200M Quadro K2200M
M3000M M3000M
vs
HD 8970 OEM HD 8970 OEM
M3000M M3000M
vs
Tesla S2050 Tesla S2050
M3000M M3000M
vs
T600 T600
M3000M M3000M
vs
Apple M1 Pro 16-Core GPU M1 Pro 16-Core GPU
M3000M M3000M
vs
RTX 2000 Max-Q Ada Generation RTX 2000 Max-Q Ada Generation
W7170M W7170M
vs
W5170M W5170M
W7170M W7170M
vs
2270 PCIe x1 2270 PCIe x1
W7170M W7170M
vs
R9 M390 Mac Edition R9 M390 Mac Edition
GTX 880M GTX 880M
vs
ATI X1300 XT X1300 XT
GTX 880M GTX 880M
vs
9400 GT 9400 GT

Community ratings

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

3.2 13 votes

Rate FirePro W7170M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 14 votes

Rate Radeon R9 M390 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about FirePro W7170M or Radeon R9 M390, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.