Radeon 740M vs R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop)

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) with Radeon 740M, including specs and performance data.

R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop)
2014
2.74

Radeon 740M outperforms R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) by a whopping 227% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking767453
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
ArchitectureGCN (2011−2017)RDNA 3
GPU code nameKaveri SpectrePhoenix
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date14 January 2014 (10 years ago)23 May 2023 (1 year ago)

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores384256
Core clock speed720 MHz1500 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2500 MHz
Number of transistorsno data25,390 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm4 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data30 Watt (30 - 15 Watt TGP)
Texture fill rateno data40.00

Form factor & compatibility

Information on Radeon R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) and Radeon 740M compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Interfaceno dataPCIe 4.0 x8
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeno dataSystem Shared
Maximum RAM amountno dataSystem Shared
Memory bus widthno dataSystem Shared
Memory clock speedno dataSystem 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 dataPortable Device Dependent

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (FL 12_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Modelno data6.7
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data2.1
Vulkanno data1.3

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 HD14
−221%
45−50
+221%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 no data

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 no data
Battlefield 5 0−1 no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 no data
Far Cry 5 0−1 no data
Far Cry New Dawn 0−1 no data
Forza Horizon 4 0−1 no data
Hitman 3 0−1 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 0−1 no data
Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 0−1 no data
Watch Dogs: Legion 0−1 no data

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 no data
Battlefield 5 0−1 no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 no data
Far Cry 5 0−1 no data
Far Cry New Dawn 0−1 no data
Forza Horizon 4 0−1 no data
Hitman 3 0−1 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 0−1 no data
Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 0−1 no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 0−1 no data
Watch Dogs: Legion 0−1 no data

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 no data
Far Cry 5 0−1 no data
Forza Horizon 4 0−1 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 0−1 no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 0−1 no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 0−1 no data
Watch Dogs: Legion 0−1 no data

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 no data

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 0−1 no data
Far Cry New Dawn 0−1 no data

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 no data
Far Cry 5 0−1 no data
Forza Horizon 4 0−1 no data
Hitman 3 0−1 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 0−1 no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 0−1 no data
Watch Dogs: Legion 0−1 no data

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 no data

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 0−1 no data
Far Cry New Dawn 0−1 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 0−1 no data

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 no data
Far Cry 5 0−1 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 0−1 no data
Metro Exodus 0−1 no data
Watch Dogs: Legion 0−1 no data

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 no data

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14
−208%
40−45
+208%
Metro Exodus 27−30
−215%
85−90
+215%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14
−208%
40−45
+208%
Metro Exodus 27−30
−215%
85−90
+215%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14
−208%
40−45
+208%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5
−200%
12−14
+200%
Metro Exodus 12−14
−192%
35−40
+192%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
−200%
30−33
+200%

4K
High Preset

Hitman 3 5−6
−220%
16−18
+220%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 4−5
−200%
12−14
+200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
−200%
18−20
+200%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
−218%
35−40
+218%

This is how R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) and Radeon 740M compete in popular games:

  • Radeon 740M is 221% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.74 8.96
Recency 14 January 2014 23 May 2023
Chip lithography 28 nm 4 nm

The Radeon 740M is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) is a desktop card while Radeon 740M is a notebook one.


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.


AMD Radeon R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop)
Radeon R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop)
AMD Radeon 740M
Radeon 740M

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.


3.9 21 vote

Rate Radeon R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2 34 votes

Rate Radeon 740M 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.