Radeon R9 M390X vs Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS and Radeon R9 M390X, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS outperforms R9 M390X by a small 8% 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 | 485 | 508 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 19.32 | 9.54 |
| Architecture | no data | GCN 3.0 (2014−2019) |
| GPU code name | no data | Amethyst |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 26 October 2023 (2 years ago) | 5 May 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 cores | 1536 | 2048 |
| Core clock speed | no data | 723 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1500 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | no data | 5,000 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 4 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 40 Watt | 100 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 92.54 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 2.961 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | no data | 32 |
| TMUs | no data | 128 |
| L1 Cache | no data | 512 KB |
| L2 Cache | no data | 512 KB |
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 | no data | large |
| Bus support | no data | PCIe 3.0 |
| Interface | no data | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | None |
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 | LPDDR5x | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | no data | 4 GB |
| Memory bus width | no data | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 8448 MHz | no data |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 160.0 GB/s |
| 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 Connectors | no data | No outputs |
| Eyefinity | - | + |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| FreeSync | - | + |
| HD3D | - | + |
| PowerTune | - | + |
| DualGraphics | - | + |
| ZeroCore | - | + |
| Switchable graphics | - | + |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12_1 | DirectX® 12 |
| Shader Model | no data | 6.3 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.4 |
| OpenCL | no data | Not Listed |
| Vulkan | - | + |
| 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.
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.
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 HD | 33
+10%
| 30−35
−10%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 55−60
+10%
|
50−55
−10%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 21−24
+10.5%
|
18−20
−10.5%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 18−20
+5.9%
|
16−18
−5.9%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 45−50
+7.1%
|
40−45
−7.1%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 55−60
+10%
|
50−55
−10%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 21−24
+10.5%
|
18−20
−10.5%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 31
+3.3%
|
30−33
−3.3%
|
| Fortnite | 60−65
+7%
|
55−60
−7%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 40−45
+7.3%
|
40−45
−7.3%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 30−35
+6.9%
|
27−30
−6.9%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 18−20
+5.9%
|
16−18
−5.9%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 35−40
+8.8%
|
30−35
−8.8%
|
| Valorant | 95−100
+5.5%
|
90−95
−5.5%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 45−50
+7.1%
|
40−45
−7.1%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 55−60
+10%
|
50−55
−10%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 150−160
+6.3%
|
140−150
−6.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 21−24
+10.5%
|
18−20
−10.5%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 30
+0%
|
30−33
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 60−65
+7%
|
55−60
−7%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 40−45
+7.3%
|
40−45
−7.3%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 30−35
+6.9%
|
27−30
−6.9%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 36
+2.9%
|
35−40
−2.9%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 18−20
+5.9%
|
16−18
−5.9%
|
| Metro Exodus | 20−22
+5.3%
|
18−20
−5.3%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 35−40
+8.8%
|
30−35
−8.8%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 41
+70.8%
|
24−27
−70.8%
|
| Valorant | 95−100
+5.5%
|
90−95
−5.5%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 45−50
+7.1%
|
40−45
−7.1%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 21−24
+10.5%
|
18−20
−10.5%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 27
−11.1%
|
30−33
+11.1%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 40−45
+7.3%
|
40−45
−7.3%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 18−20
+5.9%
|
16−18
−5.9%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 35−40
+8.8%
|
30−35
−8.8%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 22
−9.1%
|
24−27
+9.1%
|
| Valorant | 95−100
+5.5%
|
90−95
−5.5%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 60−65
+7%
|
55−60
−7%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 18−20
+5.6%
|
18−20
−5.6%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 75−80
+6.9%
|
70−75
−6.9%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
+7.7%
|
12−14
−7.7%
|
| Metro Exodus | 10−12
+10%
|
10−11
−10%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 50−55
+6.1%
|
45−50
−6.1%
|
| Valorant | 110−120
+7.7%
|
100−110
−7.7%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 24−27
+13%
|
21−24
−13%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 21−24
+10%
|
20−22
−10%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 24−27
+9.1%
|
21−24
−9.1%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 10−12
+10%
|
10−11
−10%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 14−16
+7.7%
|
12−14
−7.7%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 21−24
+10%
|
20−22
−10%
|
4K
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 5−6
+25%
|
4−5
−25%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 21−24
+5%
|
20−22
−5%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 5−6
+25%
|
4−5
−25%
|
| Metro Exodus | 6−7
+20%
|
5−6
−20%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 12−14
+20%
|
10−11
−20%
|
| Valorant | 50−55
+10.2%
|
45−50
−10.2%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 12−14
+18.2%
|
10−12
−18.2%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 5−6
+25%
|
4−5
−25%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 10−11
+11.1%
|
9−10
−11.1%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 16−18
+6.3%
|
16−18
−6.3%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 5−6
+25%
|
4−5
−25%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−11
+11.1%
|
9−10
−11.1%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 10−11
+11.1%
|
9−10
−11.1%
|
Full HD
High
| Dota 2 | 65−70
+0%
|
65−70
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Dota 2 | 65−70
+0%
|
65−70
+0%
|
4K
Ultra
| Dota 2 | 35−40
+0%
|
35−40
+0%
|
This is how Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS and R9 M390X compete in popular games:
- Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS is 10% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS is 71% faster.
- in Far Cry 5, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the R9 M390X is 11% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS performs better in 58 tests (88%)
- R9 M390X performs better in 2 tests (3%)
- there's a draw in 6 tests (9%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 10.05 | 9.31 |
| Recency | 26 October 2023 | 5 May 2015 |
| Chip lithography | 4 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 40 Watt | 100 Watt |
Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS has a 7.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 600% more advanced lithography process, and 150% lower power consumption.
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS and Radeon R9 M390X.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
