Radeon HD 7660G + HD 7670M Dual Graphics vs R7 M380
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon R7 M380 and Radeon HD 7660G + HD 7670M Dual Graphics, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
R7 M380 outperforms HD 7660G + HD 7670M Dual Graphics by a whopping 105% 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 | 739 | 939 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 (2012−2020) | Terascale 2 (2009−2015) |
| GPU code name | Tropo | no data |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 5 May 2015 (10 years ago) | 15 May 2012 (13 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 | 640 | 862 |
| Compute units | 10 | no data |
| Core clock speed | 900 MHz | 685 / 600 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 915 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | 1,500 million | no data |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 32 nm |
| Texture fill rate | 36.60 | no data |
| Floating-point processing power | 1.171 TFLOPS | no data |
| ROPs | 16 | no data |
| TMUs | 40 | no data |
| L1 Cache | 160 KB | no data |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | no 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 size | medium sized | medium sized |
| Bus support | PCIe 3.0 | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | no data |
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 | DDR3 | DDR3,GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | no data |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1000 MHz | 1800 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 32 GB/s | no data |
| 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 outputs | no data |
| Eyefinity | + | - |
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.
| DirectX | DirectX® 12 | 11 |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | no data |
| OpenGL | 4.4 | no data |
| OpenCL | Not Listed | no data |
| Mantle | + | - |
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 | 35−40
+84.2%
| 19
−84.2%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 16−18
+467%
|
3−4
−467%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 8−9
+100%
|
4−5
−100%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 16−18
+220%
|
5−6
−220%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 16−18
+467%
|
3−4
−467%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 8−9
+100%
|
4−5
−100%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 14−16
+150%
|
6−7
−150%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 12−14
+140%
|
5−6
−140%
|
| Fortnite | 21−24
+156%
|
9−10
−156%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 18−20
+72.7%
|
10−12
−72.7%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 10−12
+175%
|
4−5
−175%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 16−18
+54.5%
|
10−12
−54.5%
|
| Valorant | 55−60
+41%
|
35−40
−41%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 16−18
+220%
|
5−6
−220%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 16−18
+467%
|
3−4
−467%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 70−75
+80%
|
40−45
−80%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 8−9
+100%
|
4−5
−100%
|
| Dota 2 | 35−40
+63.6%
|
21−24
−63.6%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 14−16
+150%
|
6−7
−150%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 12−14
+140%
|
5−6
−140%
|
| Fortnite | 21−24
+156%
|
9−10
−156%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 18−20
+72.7%
|
10−12
−72.7%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 10−12
+175%
|
4−5
−175%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 12−14
+300%
|
3−4
−300%
|
| Metro Exodus | 7−8
+133%
|
3−4
−133%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 16−18
+54.5%
|
10−12
−54.5%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 12−14
+50%
|
8−9
−50%
|
| Valorant | 55−60
+41%
|
35−40
−41%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 16−18
+220%
|
5−6
−220%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 8−9
+100%
|
4−5
−100%
|
| Dota 2 | 35−40
+63.6%
|
21−24
−63.6%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 14−16
+150%
|
6−7
−150%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 12−14
+140%
|
5−6
−140%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 18−20
+72.7%
|
10−12
−72.7%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 16−18
+54.5%
|
10−12
−54.5%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 12−14
+50%
|
8−9
−50%
|
| Valorant | 55−60
+41%
|
35−40
−41%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 21−24
+156%
|
9−10
−156%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 8−9
+60%
|
5−6
−60%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 30−35
+121%
|
14−16
−121%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Metro Exodus | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 30−35
+68.4%
|
18−20
−68.4%
|
| Valorant | 40−45
+200%
|
14−16
−200%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 8−9
+100%
|
4−5
−100%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 7−8
+133%
|
3−4
−133%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−11
+100%
|
5−6
−100%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
+100%
|
3−4
−100%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 8−9
+167%
|
3−4
−167%
|
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
+7.1%
|
14−16
−7.1%
|
| Valorant | 20−22
+100%
|
10−11
−100%
|
4K
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 12−14
+225%
|
4−5
−225%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 4−5
+33.3%
|
3−4
−33.3%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 4−5
+33.3%
|
3−4
−33.3%
|
This is how R7 M380 and HD 7660G + HD 7670M Dual Graphics compete in popular games:
- R7 M380 is 84% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Counter-Strike 2, with 1080p resolution and the Low Preset, the R7 M380 is 467% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Without exception, R7 M380 surpassed HD 7660G + HD 7670M Dual Graphics in all 53 of our tests.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 3.99 | 1.95 |
| Recency | 5 May 2015 | 15 May 2012 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 32 nm |
R7 M380 has a 104.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, and a 14.3% more advanced lithography process.
The Radeon R7 M380 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 7660G + HD 7670M Dual Graphics in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
