Radeon R9 M395X vs PRO W7500

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon PRO W7500 with Radeon R9 M395X, including specs and performance data.

PRO W7500
2023, $429
8 GB GDDR6, 70 Watt
31.77
+160%

PRO W7500 outperforms R9 M395X by a whopping 160% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking194446
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation39.85no data
Power efficiency34.9512.55
ArchitectureRDNA 3.0 (2022−2026)GCN 3.0 (2014−2019)
GPU code nameNavi 33Amethyst
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date3 August 2023 (2 years ago)5 May 2015 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$429 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

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 cores17922048
Core clock speed1500 MHz723 MHz
Boost clock speed1700 MHzno data
Number of transistors13,300 million5,000 million
Manufacturing process technology6 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)70 Watt250 Watt
Texture fill rate190.492.54
Floating-point processing power12.19 TFLOPS2.961 TFLOPS
ROPs6432
TMUs112128
Ray Tracing Cores28no data
L0 Cache448 KBno data
L1 Cache512 KB512 KB
L2 Cache2 MB512 KB
L3 Cache32 MBno 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 sizeno datalarge
Bus supportno dataPCIe 3.0
InterfacePCIe 4.0 x8PCIe 3.0 x16
Length216 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeGDDR6GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount8 GB4 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1344 MHz1250 MHz
Memory bandwidth172.0 GB/s160.0 GB/s
Shared memory--
Resizable BAR+-

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 Connectors4x DisplayPort 2.1No 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-+
TrueAudio-+
ZeroCore-+
Switchable graphics-+

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_2)DirectX® 12
Shader Model6.76.3
OpenGL4.64.4
OpenCL2.2Not Listed
Vulkan1.3-
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.

PRO W7500 31.77
+160%
R9 M395X 12.22

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.

PRO W7500 13219
+159%
Samples: 114
R9 M395X 5109
Samples: 62

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

Counter-Strike 2 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Fortnite 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Valorant 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Dota 2 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Fortnite 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Metro Exodus 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Valorant 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Dota 2 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Valorant 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Valorant 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Metro Exodus 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Dota 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 60 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 31.77 12.22
Recency 3 August 2023 5 May 2015
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 6 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 70 Watt 250 Watt

PRO W7500 has a 160% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 367% more advanced lithography process, and 257% lower power consumption.

The Radeon PRO W7500 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R9 M395X in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon PRO W7500 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon R9 M395X is a notebook one.

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.


4.1 23 votes

Rate Radeon PRO W7500 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 18 votes

Rate Radeon R9 M395X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon PRO W7500 or Radeon R9 M395X, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.