Radeon RX 6950 XT vs R9 380X

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 380X and Radeon RX 6950 XT, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

R9 380X
2015
4 GB GDDR5, 190 Watt
16.03

RX 6950 XT outperforms R9 380X by a whopping 355% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking32915
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation7.9727.09
Power efficiency5.8615.13
ArchitectureGCN 3.0 (2014−2019)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code nameAntiguaNavi 21
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Designreferenceno data
Release date19 November 2015 (8 years ago)10 May 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$229 $1,099

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

RX 6950 XT has 240% better value for money than R9 380X.

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 cores20485120
Compute units32no data
Core clock speedno data1925 MHz
Boost clock speed970 MHz2324 MHz
Number of transistors5,000 million26,800 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)190 Watt335 Watt
Texture fill rate124.2743.7
Floating-point processing power3.973 TFLOPS23.8 TFLOPS
ROPs32128
TMUs128320
Ray Tracing Coresno data80

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 4.0 x16
Length221 mm267 mm
Width2-slot3-slot
Form factorfull height / full lengthno data
Supplementary power connectors​2 x 6-pin2x 8-pin
Bridgeless CrossFire+-

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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
High bandwidth memory (HBM)-no data
Maximum RAM amount4 GB16 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed970 MHz2250 MHz
Memory bandwidth182.4 GB/s576.0 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 HDMI 2.1, 2x DisplayPort 1.4a
Eyefinity+-
Number of Eyefinity displays6no data
HDMI++
DisplayPort support+-

Supported technologies

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

CrossFire+-
FRTC+-
FreeSync+-
HD3D+-
LiquidVR+-
PowerTune+-
TrueAudio+-
ZeroCore+-
VCE+-
DDMA audio+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.36.5
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL2.02.1
Vulkan+1.3
Mantle+-

Synthetic benchmark performance

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. 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 380X 16.03
RX 6950 XT 72.97
+355%

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.

R9 380X 6187
RX 6950 XT 28158
+355%

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.

R9 380X 9510
RX 6950 XT 59882
+530%

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 HD45−50
−402%
226
+402%
1440p30−35
−367%
140
+367%
4K18−20
−372%
85
+372%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 161
+0%
161
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Battlefield 5 230−240
+0%
230−240
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 143
+0%
143
+0%
Far Cry 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 240−250
+0%
240−250
+0%
Hitman 3 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 260−270
+0%
260−270
+0%
Metro Exodus 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 300−350
+0%
300−350
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Battlefield 5 230−240
+0%
230−240
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 128
+0%
128
+0%
Far Cry 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 240−250
+0%
240−250
+0%
Hitman 3 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 260−270
+0%
260−270
+0%
Metro Exodus 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 442
+0%
442
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 122
+0%
122
+0%
Far Cry 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 240−250
+0%
240−250
+0%
Hitman 3 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 318
+0%
318
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 396
+0%
396
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 216
+0%
216
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 107
+0%
107
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 93
+0%
93
+0%
Far Cry 5 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%
Hitman 3 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 255
+0%
255
+0%
Metro Exodus 132
+0%
132
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 294
+0%
294
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 240−250
+0%
240−250
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Hitman 3 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 220−230
+0%
220−230
+0%
Metro Exodus 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 144
+0%
144
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 46
+0%
46
+0%
Far Cry 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 172
+0%
172
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 65
+0%
65
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%

This is how R9 380X and RX 6950 XT compete in popular games:

  • RX 6950 XT is 402% faster in 1080p
  • RX 6950 XT is 367% faster in 1440p
  • RX 6950 XT is 372% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 72 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 16.03 72.97
Recency 19 November 2015 10 May 2022
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 16 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 190 Watt 335 Watt

R9 380X has 76.3% lower power consumption.

RX 6950 XT, on the other hand, has a 355.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 300% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 6950 XT is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R9 380X 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 380X
Radeon R9 380X
AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT
Radeon RX 6950 XT

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.


3.8 181 vote

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 2701 vote

Rate Radeon RX 6950 XT 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.