Radeon R9 380 vs GeForce GTX 780

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 780 and Radeon R9 380, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTX 780
2013
3 GB GDDR5, 250 Watt
20.85
+31.2%

GTX 780 outperforms R9 380 by a substantial 31% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking268342
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation4.799.07
Power efficiency5.755.77
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)GCN 3.0 (2014−2019)
GPU code nameGK110Antigua
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Designno datareference
Release date23 May 2013 (11 years ago)18 June 2015 (9 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$649 $199

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

R9 380 has 89% better value for money than GTX 780.

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 cores23041792
Compute unitsno data28
Core clock speed863 MHzno data
Boost clock speed900 MHz970 MHz
Number of transistors7,080 million5,000 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Watt190 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature95 °Cno data
Texture fill rate173.2108.6
Floating-point processing power4.156 TFLOPS3.476 TFLOPS
ROPs4832
TMUs192112

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 supportPCI Express 3.0PCIe 3.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length267 mm221 mm
Height4.376" (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slot2-slot
Form factorno datafull height / full length / dual slot
Minimum recommended system power600 Wattno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin2 x 6-pin
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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
High bandwidth memory (HBM)no data-
Maximum RAM amount3 GB4 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1502 MHz970 MHz
Memory bandwidth288.4 GB/s182.4 GB/s
Shared memoryno data-

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 ConnectorsOne Dual Link DVI-I, One Dual Link DVI-D, One HDMI, One DisplayPort2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
Multi monitor support4 displaysno data
Eyefinity-+
Number of Eyefinity displaysno data6
HDMI++
HDCP+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
DisplayPort support-+
Audio input for HDMIInternalno data

Supported technologies

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

CrossFire-+
FRTC-+
FreeSync-+
HD3D-+
LiquidVR-+
PowerTune-+
TrueAudio-+
ZeroCore-+
VCE-+
DDMA audiono data+
Blu Ray 3D+-
3D Gaming+-
3D Vision+-
PhysX+-
3D Vision Live+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)DirectX® 12
Shader Model5.16.3
OpenGL4.34.5
OpenCL1.22.0
Vulkan1.1.126+
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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

GTX 780 20.85
+31.2%
R9 380 15.89

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.

GTX 780 8015
+31.2%
R9 380 6110

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.

GTX 780 10460
+27.3%
R9 380 8218

Unigine Heaven 4.0

This is an old DirectX 11 benchmark, a newer version of Unigine 3.0 with relatively small differences. It displays a fantasy medieval town sprawling over several flying islands. The benchmark is still sometimes used, despite its significant age, as it was released back in 2013.

GTX 780 1558
+67.9%
R9 380 928

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 HD54
−20.4%
65
+20.4%
4K35−40
+29.6%
27
−29.6%

Cost per frame, $

1080p12.02
−293%
3.06
+293%
4K18.54
−152%
7.37
+152%
  • R9 380 has 293% lower cost per frame in 1080p
  • R9 380 has 152% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Elden Ring 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Metro Exodus 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Valorant 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Dota 2 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Elden Ring 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Far Cry 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Fortnite 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Metro Exodus 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 52
+0%
52
+0%
Valorant 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
World of Tanks 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Dota 2 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Far Cry 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Valorant 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Elden Ring 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
World of Tanks 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Metro Exodus 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Valorant 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Dota 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Elden Ring 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Metro Exodus 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Dota 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Far Cry 5 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Fortnite 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Valorant 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

This is how GTX 780 and R9 380 compete in popular games:

  • R9 380 is 20% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 780 is 30% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 63 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 20.85 15.89
Recency 23 May 2013 18 June 2015
Maximum RAM amount 3 GB 4 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 250 Watt 190 Watt

GTX 780 has a 31.2% higher aggregate performance score.

R9 380, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, a 33.3% higher maximum VRAM amount, and 31.6% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 780 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R9 380 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

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.


NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780
GeForce GTX 780
AMD Radeon R9 380
Radeon R9 380

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 1057 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 780 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 821 vote

Rate Radeon R9 380 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.