FirePro S9000 vs Radeon R7 M380

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R7 M380 with FirePro S9000, including specs and performance data.

R7 M380
2015
4 GB DDR3
3.95

S9000 outperforms R7 M380 by a whopping 204% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking737441
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.43
Power efficiencyno data4.13
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2012−2020)GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)
GPU code nameTropoTahiti
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date5 May 2015 (10 years ago)24 August 2012 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$2,499

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 cores6401792
Compute units10no data
Core clock speed900 MHz900 MHz
Boost clock speed915 MHzno data
Number of transistors1,500 million4,313 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data350 Watt
Texture fill rate36.60100.8
Floating-point processing power1.171 TFLOPS3.226 TFLOPS
ROPs1632
TMUs40112
L1 Cache160 KB448 KB
L2 Cache256 KB768 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 sizemedium sizedno data
Bus supportPCIe 3.0PCIe 3.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data267 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Form factorno datafull height / full length
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x 8-pin

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 typeDDR3GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount4 GB6 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit384 Bit
Memory clock speed1000 MHz1375 MHz
Memory bandwidth32 GB/s264 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 ConnectorsNo outputs1x DisplayPort
Eyefinity+-
DisplayPort countno data1
Dual-link DVI support-+

Supported technologies

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

AppAcceleration+-
FreeSync+-
HD3D+-
PowerTune+-
DualGraphics+-
ZeroCore+-
Switchable graphics+-

API and SDK support

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212 (11_1)
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.44.6
OpenCLNot Listed1.2
Vulkan-1.2.131
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.

R7 M380 3.95
FirePro S9000 11.99
+204%

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.

R7 M380 1668
Samples: 2
FirePro S9000 5059
+203%
Samples: 6

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 16−18
−194%
50−55
+194%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
−200%
24−27
+200%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 16−18
−181%
45−50
+181%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
−194%
50−55
+194%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
−200%
24−27
+200%
Escape from Tarkov 14−16
−200%
45−50
+200%
Far Cry 5 12−14
−192%
35−40
+192%
Fortnite 21−24
−183%
65−70
+183%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
−189%
55−60
+189%
Forza Horizon 5 10−12
−173%
30−33
+173%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
−194%
50−55
+194%
Valorant 50−55
−196%
160−170
+196%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 16−18
−181%
45−50
+181%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
−194%
50−55
+194%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 70−75
−192%
210−220
+192%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
−200%
24−27
+200%
Dota 2 35−40
−178%
100−105
+178%
Escape from Tarkov 14−16
−200%
45−50
+200%
Far Cry 5 12−14
−192%
35−40
+192%
Fortnite 21−24
−183%
65−70
+183%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
−189%
55−60
+189%
Forza Horizon 5 10−12
−173%
30−33
+173%
Grand Theft Auto V 12−14
−192%
35−40
+192%
Metro Exodus 7−8
−200%
21−24
+200%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
−194%
50−55
+194%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
−192%
35−40
+192%
Valorant 50−55
−196%
160−170
+196%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 16−18
−181%
45−50
+181%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
−200%
24−27
+200%
Dota 2 35−40
−178%
100−105
+178%
Escape from Tarkov 14−16
−200%
45−50
+200%
Far Cry 5 12−14
−192%
35−40
+192%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
−189%
55−60
+189%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
−194%
50−55
+194%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
−192%
35−40
+192%
Valorant 50−55
−196%
160−170
+196%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 21−24
−183%
65−70
+183%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 8−9
−200%
24−27
+200%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 30−35
−190%
90−95
+190%
Grand Theft Auto V 2−3
−200%
6−7
+200%
Metro Exodus 2−3
−200%
6−7
+200%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
−197%
95−100
+197%
Valorant 40−45
−186%
120−130
+186%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−200%
9−10
+200%
Escape from Tarkov 8−9
−200%
24−27
+200%
Far Cry 5 7−8
−200%
21−24
+200%
Forza Horizon 4 10−11
−200%
30−33
+200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
−200%
18−20
+200%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 8−9
−200%
24−27
+200%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
−181%
45−50
+181%
Valorant 20−22
−200%
60−65
+200%

4K
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%
Dota 2 12−14
−169%
35−40
+169%
Escape from Tarkov 2−3
−200%
6−7
+200%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−200%
9−10
+200%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
−180%
14−16
+180%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 4−5
−200%
12−14
+200%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 4−5
−200%
12−14
+200%

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.95 11.99
Recency 5 May 2015 24 August 2012
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 6 GB

R7 M380 has an age advantage of 2 years.

FirePro S9000, on the other hand, has a 203.5% higher aggregate performance score, and a 50% higher maximum VRAM amount.

The FirePro S9000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 M380 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R7 M380 is a notebook graphics card while FirePro S9000 is a workstation one.

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 M380
Radeon R7 M380
AMD FirePro S9000
FirePro S9000

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.


1 3 votes

Rate Radeon R7 M380 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.7 7 votes

Rate FirePro S9000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R7 M380 or FirePro S9000, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.