Radeon Pro 450 vs R9 380

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 380 with Radeon Pro 450, including specs and performance data.

R9 380
2015
4 GB GDDR5, 190 Watt
15.91
+126%

R9 380 outperforms Pro 450 by a whopping 126% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking315523
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation9.084.24
ArchitectureGCN (2011−2017)Polaris (2016−2019)
GPU code nameTonga ProPolaris 11
Market segmentDesktopMobile workstation
Designreferenceno data
Release date26 June 2015 (9 years ago)27 October 2016 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$199 no data
Current price$12.90 (0.1x MSRP)$183

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

R9 380 has 114% better value for money than Pro 450.

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 cores1792640
Compute units28no data
Core clock speedno data800 MHz
Boost clock speed970 MHzno data
Number of transistors5,000 million3,000 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)190 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rate108.632.00
Floating-point performance3,476 gflops1,024 gflops

Form factor & compatibility

Information on Radeon R9 380 and Radeon Pro 450 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.

Laptop sizeno datalarge
Bus supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x8
Length221 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Form factorfull height / full length / dual slotno data
Supplementary power connectors2 x 6-pinno data
Bridgeless CrossFire1no 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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
High bandwidth memory (HBM)-no data
Maximum RAM amount4 GB2 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed970 MHz5080 MHz
Memory bandwidth182.4 GB/s81.28 GB/s
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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPortNo outputs
Eyefinity+no data
Number of Eyefinity displays6no data
HDMI+no data
DisplayPort support+no data

Supported technologies

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

AppAcceleration-no data
CrossFire1no data
Enduro-no data
FRTC1no data
FreeSync1+
HD3D+no data
LiquidVR1no data
PowerTune+no data
TrueAudio+no data
ZeroCore+no data
VCE+no data
DDMA audio+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212 (12_0)
Shader Model6.36.4
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL2.02.0
Vulkan+1.2.131
Mantle+no data

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

R9 380 15.91
+126%
Pro 450 7.05

R9 380 outperforms Pro 450 by 126% based on our aggregate benchmark results.


Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

R9 380 6146
+126%
Pro 450 2722

R9 380 outperforms Pro 450 by 126% in Passmark.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

R9 380 12191
+171%
Pro 450 4502

R9 380 outperforms Pro 450 by 171% in 3DMark 11 Performance GPU.

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

R9 380 29722
+109%
Pro 450 14245

R9 380 outperforms Pro 450 by 109% in 3DMark Vantage Performance.

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

R9 380 8218
+153%
Pro 450 3252

R9 380 outperforms Pro 450 by 153% in 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics.

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

R9 380 50723
+136%
Pro 450 21533

R9 380 outperforms Pro 450 by 136% in 3DMark Cloud Gate GPU.

3DMark Ice Storm GPU

Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.

Benchmark coverage: 8%

R9 380 303773
+51.5%
Pro 450 200518

R9 380 outperforms Pro 450 by 51% in 3DMark Ice Storm GPU.

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 HD63
+110%
30
−110%
4K24
+26.3%
19
−26.3%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 24−27 no data

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30−35 no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 24−27 no data
Battlefield 5 50−55 no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−35 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27 no data
Far Cry 5 35−40 no data
Far Cry New Dawn 40−45 no data
Forza Horizon 4 75−80 no data
Hitman 3 30−35 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 60−65 no data
Metro Exodus 50−55 no data
Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45 no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 50−55 no data
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55 no data

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30−35 no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 24−27 no data
Battlefield 5 50−55 no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−35 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27 no data
Far Cry 5 35−40 no data
Far Cry New Dawn 40−45 no data
Forza Horizon 4 75−80 no data
Hitman 3 30−35 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 60−65 no data
Metro Exodus 50−55 no data
Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45 no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 50−55 no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 51 no data
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55 no data

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30−35 no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 24−27 no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−35 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27 no data
Far Cry 5 35−40 no data
Forza Horizon 4 75−80 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 60−65 no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 50−55 no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30 no data
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55 no data

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45 no data

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 30−35 no data
Far Cry New Dawn 30−33 no data

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 16−18 no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14 no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 20−22 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9 no data
Far Cry 5 24−27 no data
Forza Horizon 4 30−35 no data
Hitman 3 18−20 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35 no data
Metro Exodus 27−30 no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 30−33 no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18 no data
Watch Dogs: Legion 10−11 no data

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27 no data

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 16−18 no data
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14 no data
Hitman 3 12−14 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18 no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11 no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 19 no data

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10 no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 8−9 no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8−9 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4 no data
Far Cry 5 9−10 no data
Forza Horizon 4 21−24 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18 no data
Metro Exodus 14−16 no data
Watch Dogs: Legion 6−7 no data

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16 no data

This is how R9 380 and Pro 450 compete in popular games:

  • R9 380 is 110% faster in 1080p
  • R9 380 is 26% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 15.91 7.05
Recency 26 June 2015 27 October 2016
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 2 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 190 Watt 75 Watt

The Radeon R9 380 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon Pro 450 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R9 380 is a desktop card while Radeon Pro 450 is a mobile workstation 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 R9 380
Radeon R9 380
AMD Radeon Pro 450
Radeon Pro 450

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.


4.1 765 votes

Rate Radeon R9 380 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 49 votes

Rate Radeon Pro 450 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.