Radeon R5 M315 vs GeForce 9800M GTX
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce 9800M GTX and Radeon R5 M315, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
R5 M315 outperforms 9800M GTX by a small 5% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1100 | 1076 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.06 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 1.06 | no data |
| Architecture | Tesla (2006−2010) | GCN 3.0 (2014−2019) |
| GPU code name | G92 | Meso |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 15 July 2008 (16 years ago) | 5 May 2015 (9 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $328.50 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.
Performance to price scatter graph
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 cores | 112 | 384 |
| CUDA cores per GPU | 112 | no data |
| Compute units | no data | 5 |
| Core clock speed | 500 MHz | 970 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 754 million | 1,550 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 65 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 75 Watt | no data |
| Texture fill rate | 28.00 | 23.28 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.28 TFLOPS | 0.745 TFLOPS |
| Gigaflops | 420 | no data |
| ROPs | 16 | 8 |
| TMUs | 56 | 24 |
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 size | large | no data |
| Bus support | no data | PCIe 3.0 |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | no data |
| SLI options | + | - |
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 type | GDDR3 | DDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 800 MHz | 1000 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 51.2 GB/s | 14.4 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
Connectivity and outputs
Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.
| Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| HD3D | - | + |
| PowerTune | - | + |
| DualGraphics | - | + |
| ZeroCore | - | + |
| Switchable graphics | - | + |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11.1 (10_0) | DirectX® 12 |
| Shader Model | 4.0 | 6.0 |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 4.4 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | Not Listed |
| Vulkan | N/A | - |
| Mantle | - | + |
| CUDA | + | - |
Synthetic benchmark performance
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.
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.
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−50%
|
3−4
+50%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 0−1 | 1−2 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−50%
|
3−4
+50%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Fortnite | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
−16.7%
|
7−8
+16.7%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−3.1%
|
30−35
+3.1%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 0−1 | 1−2 |
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 24−27
−3.8%
|
27−30
+3.8%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−50%
|
3−4
+50%
|
| Dota 2 | 14−16
−6.7%
|
16−18
+6.7%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Fortnite | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
−16.7%
|
7−8
+16.7%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
+0%
|
6−7
+0%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−3.1%
|
30−35
+3.1%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 0−1 | 1−2 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−50%
|
3−4
+50%
|
| Dota 2 | 14−16
−6.7%
|
16−18
+6.7%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
−16.7%
|
7−8
+16.7%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
+0%
|
6−7
+0%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−3.1%
|
30−35
+3.1%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 0−1 | 1−2 |
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 6−7
−16.7%
|
7−8
+16.7%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 6−7
−16.7%
|
7−8
+16.7%
|
| Valorant | 2−3
−50%
|
3−4
+50%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
4K
High Preset
| Grand Theft Auto V | 16−18
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
| Valorant | 6−7
+0%
|
6−7
+0%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Grand Theft Auto V | 0−1 | 0−1 |
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Cyberpunk 2077, with 1080p resolution and the Low Preset, the R5 M315 is 50% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- R5 M315 is ahead in 16 tests (42%)
- there's a draw in 22 tests (58%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.11 | 1.17 |
| Recency | 15 July 2008 | 5 May 2015 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 4 GB |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 28 nm |
R5 M315 has a 5.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 132.1% more advanced lithography process.
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between GeForce 9800M GTX and Radeon R5 M315.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
