Radeon R8 M365DX vs GeForce GTX 780M SLI

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 780M SLI and Radeon R8 M365DX, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTX 780M SLI
2013
2x 4 GB GDDR5, 200 Watt
19.52
+1062%

GTX 780M SLI outperforms R8 M365DX by a whopping 1062% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking286940
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency6.69no data
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)GCN 3.0 (2014−2019)
GPU code nameN14E-GTXMeso
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date30 May 2013 (11 years ago)3 June 2015 (9 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 cores3072384
Core clock speed823 MHz900 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1125 MHz
Number of transistors7080 Million1,550 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)200 Wattno data
Texture fill rateno data27.00
Floating-point processing powerno data0.864 TFLOPS
ROPsno data8
TMUsno data24

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 sizelargemedium sized
Interfaceno dataIGP
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 typeGDDR5System Shared
Maximum RAM amount2x 4 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width2x 256 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed5000 MHzSystem Shared
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 Connectorsno dataNo outputs

Supported technologies

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

Optimus+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX1112 (12_0)
Shader Modelno data6.0
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data2.0
Vulkan-1.2.131
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 780M SLI 19.52
+1062%
R8 M365DX 1.68

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.

GTX 780M SLI 14140
+394%
R8 M365DX 2863

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

GTX 780M SLI 36004
+415%
R8 M365DX 6992

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 780M SLI 10091
+431%
R8 M365DX 1902

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

GTX 780M SLI 66148
+486%
R8 M365DX 11291

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 HD98
+654%
13
−654%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+700%
4−5
−700%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 45−50
+543%
7−8
−543%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−35
+1600%
2−3
−1600%
Battlefield 5 65−70 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 40−45
+720%
5−6
−720%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+700%
4−5
−700%
Far Cry 5 45−50
+2250%
2−3
−2250%
Far Cry New Dawn 50−55
+1250%
4−5
−1250%
Forza Horizon 4 120−130
+2400%
5−6
−2400%
Hitman 3 40−45
+567%
6−7
−567%
Horizon Zero Dawn 95−100
+506%
16−18
−506%
Metro Exodus 70−75
+1067%
6−7
−1067%
Red Dead Redemption 2 50−55
+1700%
3−4
−1700%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 65−70
+644%
9−10
−644%
Watch Dogs: Legion 90−95
+171%
30−35
−171%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 45−50
+543%
7−8
−543%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−35
+1600%
2−3
−1600%
Battlefield 5 65−70 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 40−45
+720%
5−6
−720%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+700%
4−5
−700%
Far Cry 5 45−50
+2250%
2−3
−2250%
Far Cry New Dawn 50−55
+1250%
4−5
−1250%
Forza Horizon 4 120−130
+2400%
5−6
−2400%
Hitman 3 40−45
+567%
6−7
−567%
Horizon Zero Dawn 95−100
+506%
16−18
−506%
Metro Exodus 70−75
+1067%
6−7
−1067%
Red Dead Redemption 2 50−55
+1700%
3−4
−1700%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 65−70
+644%
9−10
−644%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 45−50
+181%
16
−181%
Watch Dogs: Legion 90−95
+171%
30−35
−171%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 45−50
+543%
7−8
−543%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−35
+1600%
2−3
−1600%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 40−45
+720%
5−6
−720%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+700%
4−5
−700%
Far Cry 5 45−50
+2250%
2−3
−2250%
Forza Horizon 4 120−130
+2400%
5−6
−2400%
Hitman 3 40−45
+567%
6−7
−567%
Horizon Zero Dawn 95−100
+506%
16−18
−506%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 65−70
+644%
9−10
−644%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 45−50
+275%
12−14
−275%
Watch Dogs: Legion 90−95
+171%
30−35
−171%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 50−55
+1700%
3−4
−1700%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+1850%
2−3
−1850%
Far Cry New Dawn 30−35
+1450%
2−3
−1450%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 21−24
+2000%
1−2
−2000%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 18−20
+1700%
1−2
−1700%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
+2100%
1−2
−2100%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+1100%
1−2
−1100%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+1050%
2−3
−1050%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+1156%
9−10
−1156%
Hitman 3 24−27
+243%
7−8
−243%
Horizon Zero Dawn 40−45
+720%
5−6
−720%
Metro Exodus 35−40
+1167%
3−4
−1167%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 40−45
+1267%
3−4
−1267%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+2200%
1−2
−2200%
Watch Dogs: Legion 110−120
+1222%
9−10
−1222%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 30−35
+725%
4−5
−725%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 20−22
+1900%
1−2
−1900%
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16
+1400%
1−2
−1400%
Hitman 3 14−16
+1400%
1−2
−1400%
Horizon Zero Dawn 100−110
+1200%
8−9
−1200%
Metro Exodus 21−24
+2100%
1−2
−2100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+2000%
1−2
−2000%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
+500%
2−3
−500%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−11
+900%
1−2
−900%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−12 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5 0−1
Far Cry 5 10−12
+1000%
1−2
−1000%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+1300%
2−3
−1300%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 21−24
+2200%
1−2
−2200%
Watch Dogs: Legion 9−10 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 18−20
+500%
3−4
−500%

This is how GTX 780M SLI and R8 M365DX compete in popular games:

  • GTX 780M SLI is 654% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the GTX 780M SLI is 2400% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, GTX 780M SLI surpassed R8 M365DX in all 51 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 19.52 1.68
Recency 30 May 2013 3 June 2015

GTX 780M SLI has a 1061.9% higher aggregate performance score.

R8 M365DX, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years.

The GeForce GTX 780M SLI is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R8 M365DX 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 780M SLI
GeForce GTX 780M SLI
AMD Radeon R8 M365DX
Radeon R8 M365DX

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


3.4 5 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.1 8 votes

Rate Radeon R8 M365DX 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.