Radeon RX 460 vs R9 380

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

R9 380
2015
4 GB GDDR5, 190 Watt
15.90
+49.9%

R9 380 outperforms RX 460 by an impressive 50% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking315400
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation9.081.25
ArchitectureGCN (2011−2017)Polaris (2016−2019)
GPU code nameTonga ProPolaris 11 / Baffin XT
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Designreferenceno data
Release date26 June 2015 (8 years ago)8 August 2016 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$199 $86
Current price$12.90 (0.1x MSRP)$397 (4.6x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

R9 380 has 626% better value for money than RX 460.

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 cores1792896
Compute units28no data
Core clock speedno data1090 MHz
Boost clock speed970 MHz1200 MHz
Number of transistors5,000 million3,000 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)190 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rate108.667.20
Floating-point performance3,476 gflops2,150 gflops

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).

Bus supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x8
Length221 mm170 mm
Width2-slot2-slot
Form factorfull height / full length / dual slotno data
Supplementary power connectors2 x 6-pinNone
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 GB4 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed970 MHz7000 MHz
Memory bandwidth182.4 GB/s112.0 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 DisplayPort1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
Eyefinity+no data
Number of Eyefinity displays6no data
HDMI++
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 15.90
+49.9%
RX 460 10.61

R9 380 outperforms RX 460 by 50% based on our aggregated 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 6149
+49.9%
RX 460 4101

R9 380 outperforms RX 460 by 50% 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
+41.8%
RX 460 8597

R9 380 outperforms RX 460 by 42% in 3DMark 11 Performance GPU.

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
+44.2%
RX 460 5701

R9 380 outperforms RX 460 by 44% 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
+45.4%
RX 460 34892

R9 380 outperforms RX 460 by 45% 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
RX 460 307888
+1.4%

RX 460 outperforms R9 380 by 1% 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 HD66
+57.1%
42
−57.1%
1440p140−150
+45.8%
96
−45.8%
4K24
+20%
20
−20%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+56.3%
16−18
−56.3%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30−35
−3%
34
+3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 24−27
+62.5%
16−18
−62.5%
Battlefield 5 50−55
+57.6%
30−35
−57.6%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35−40
+52.2%
21−24
−52.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+56.3%
16−18
−56.3%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+38.7%
30−35
−38.7%
Far Cry New Dawn 40−45
+51.7%
27−30
−51.7%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
−7.5%
57
+7.5%
Hitman 3 35−40
+54.2%
24−27
−54.2%
Horizon Zero Dawn 50−55
−171%
138
+171%
Metro Exodus 45−50
+9.1%
44
−9.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
+46.7%
30−33
−46.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 45−50
+50%
30−33
−50%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
+52.6%
18−20
−52.6%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30−35
+17.9%
28
−17.9%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 24−27
+62.5%
16−18
−62.5%
Battlefield 5 50−55
+136%
22
−136%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35−40
+52.2%
21−24
−52.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+56.3%
16−18
−56.3%
Far Cry 5 40−45
−2.3%
44
+2.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 40−45
+29.4%
34
−29.4%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
−1.9%
54
+1.9%
Hitman 3 35−40
+54.2%
24−27
−54.2%
Horizon Zero Dawn 50−55
−122%
113
+122%
Metro Exodus 45−50
+26.3%
38
−26.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
+46.7%
30−33
−46.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 45−50
+246%
13
−246%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 51
+37.8%
37
−37.8%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
+52.6%
18−20
−52.6%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30−35
+94.1%
17
−94.1%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 24−27
+62.5%
16−18
−62.5%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35−40
+52.2%
21−24
−52.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+56.3%
16−18
−56.3%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+38.7%
30−35
−38.7%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+29.3%
41
−29.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 50−55
+41.7%
36
−41.7%
Metro Exodus 45−50
+37.1%
35
−37.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30
+30.4%
23
−30.4%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
+52.6%
18−20
−52.6%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
+46.7%
30−33
−46.7%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 30−35
+47.6%
21−24
−47.6%
Far Cry New Dawn 30−33
+66.7%
18−20
−66.7%
Hitman 3 21−24
+64.3%
14−16
−64.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+71.4%
7−8
−71.4%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 16−18
+60%
10−11
−60%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14
+117%
6−7
−117%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 20−22
+53.8%
12−14
−53.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+60%
5−6
−60%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+52.9%
16−18
−52.9%
Forza Horizon 4 30−33
+50%
20−22
−50%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
+28%
25
−28%
Metro Exodus 27−30
+75%
16−18
−75%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 30−33
+100%
14−16
−100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+70%
10−11
−70%
Watch Dogs: Legion 10−11
+66.7%
6−7
−66.7%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry 5 30−35
+50%
22
−50%
Far Cry New Dawn 16−18
+77.8%
9−10
−77.8%
Hitman 3 12−14
+71.4%
7−8
−71.4%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
+54.5%
10−12
−54.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
+66.7%
6−7
−66.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 19
+58.3%
12
−58.3%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 8−9
+60%
5−6
−60%
Battlefield 5 16−18
+88.9%
9−10
−88.9%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−12
+83.3%
6−7
−83.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+61.5%
12−14
−61.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
+30.8%
13
−30.8%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+25%
12
−25%
Watch Dogs: Legion 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+40%
10−11
−40%

This is how R9 380 and RX 460 compete in popular games:

  • R9 380 is 57% faster in 1080p
  • R9 380 is 46% faster in 1440p
  • R9 380 is 20% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Shadow of the Tomb Raider, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the R9 380 is 246% faster than the RX 460.
  • in Horizon Zero Dawn, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the RX 460 is 171% faster than the R9 380.

All in all, in popular games:

  • R9 380 is ahead in 66 tests (92%)
  • RX 460 is ahead in 6 tests (8%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 15.90 10.61
Recency 26 June 2015 8 August 2016
Cost $199 $86
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 RX 460 in performance tests.


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 RX 460
Radeon RX 460

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.


4.1 754 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 906 votes

Rate Radeon RX 460 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.