Radeon HD 7500G + HD 7550M Dual Graphics vs R9 390
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon R9 390 with Radeon HD 7500G + HD 7550M Dual Graphics, including specs and performance data.
R9 390 outperforms HD 7500G + HD 7550M Dual Graphics by a whopping 1825% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
Place in the ranking | 250 | 1065 |
Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 11.82 | no data |
Power efficiency | 5.76 | no data |
Architecture | GCN 2.0 (2013−2017) | Terascale 3 (2010−2013) |
GPU code name | Grenada | no data |
Market segment | Desktop | Laptop |
Design | reference | no data |
Release date | 18 June 2015 (9 years ago) | 15 May 2012 (12 years ago) |
Launch price (MSRP) | $329 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.
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 | 2560 | 736 |
Core clock speed | no data | 655 / 600 MHz |
Boost clock speed | 1000 MHz | no data |
Number of transistors | 6,200 million | no data |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 40 nm |
Power consumption (TDP) | 275 Watt | no data |
Texture fill rate | 160.0 | no data |
Floating-point processing power | 5.12 TFLOPS | no data |
ROPs | 64 | no data |
TMUs | 160 | 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 | no data | medium sized |
Bus support | PCIe 3.0 | no data |
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | no data |
Length | 275 mm | no data |
Width | 2-slot | no data |
Supplementary power connectors | 1 x 6-pin, 1 x 8-pin | no data |
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 type | GDDR5 | no data |
High bandwidth memory (HBM) | - | no data |
Maximum RAM amount | 0 MB | no data |
Memory bus width | 512 Bit | 128 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 1000 MHz | 1800 MHz |
Memory bandwidth | 384 GB/s | no data |
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 Connectors | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort | no data |
Eyefinity | + | - |
Number of Eyefinity displays | 6 | no data |
HDMI | + | - |
DisplayPort support | + | - |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
CrossFire | + | - |
FreeSync | + | - |
PowerTune | + | - |
TrueAudio | + | - |
VCE | + | - |
DDMA audio | + | no data |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
DirectX | DirectX® 12 | 11 |
Shader Model | 6.3 | no data |
OpenGL | 4.6 | no data |
OpenCL | 2.0 | no data |
Vulkan | + | - |
Mantle | + | - |
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 Preset
Atomic Heart | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
Counter-Strike 2 | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
Atomic Heart | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
Battlefield 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Counter-Strike 2 | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
Fortnite | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
+0%
|
6−7
+0%
|
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
Valorant | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
Full HD
High Preset
Atomic Heart | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
Battlefield 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Counter-Strike 2 | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 27−30
+0%
|
27−30
+0%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
Dota 2 | 16−18
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
Fortnite | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
+0%
|
6−7
+0%
|
Grand Theft Auto V | 0−1 | 0−1 |
Metro Exodus | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
Valorant | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
Battlefield 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Counter-Strike 2 | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
Dota 2 | 16−18
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
+0%
|
6−7
+0%
|
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
Valorant | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
Fortnite | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
1440p
High Preset
Counter-Strike 2 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 6−7
+0%
|
6−7
+0%
|
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
Valorant | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Far Cry 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
Fortnite | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
4K
High Preset
Atomic Heart | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
Valorant | 6−7
+0%
|
6−7
+0%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
Dota 2 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
Far Cry 5 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
4K
Epic Preset
Fortnite | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
All in all, in popular games:
- there's a draw in 47 tests (100%)
Pros & cons summary
Performance score | 23.10 | 1.20 |
Recency | 18 June 2015 | 15 May 2012 |
Chip lithography | 28 nm | 40 nm |
R9 390 has a 1825% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.
The Radeon R9 390 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 7500G + HD 7550M Dual Graphics in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon R9 390 is a desktop card while Radeon HD 7500G + HD 7550M Dual Graphics is a notebook one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.