GeForce GTX 980 vs Radeon R9 390X

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 390X and GeForce GTX 980, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

R9 390X
2015
0 MB GDDR5, 275 Watt
23.54

GTX 980 outperforms R9 390X by a moderate 18% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking231199
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation9.7510.62
Power efficiency6.1312.06
ArchitectureGCN 2.0 (2013−2017)Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)
GPU code nameGrenadaGM204
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Designreferenceno data
Release date18 June 2015 (9 years ago)19 September 2014 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$429 $549

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTX 980 has 9% better value for money than R9 390X.

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 cores28162048
Core clock speedno data1064 MHz
Boost clock speed1050 MHz1216 MHz
Number of transistors6,200 million5,200 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)275 Watt165 Watt
Texture fill rate184.8155.6
Floating-point processing power5.914 TFLOPS4.981 TFLOPS
ROPs6464
TMUs176128

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 3.0PCI Express 3.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length275 mm267 mm
Heightno data4.376" (11.1 cm)
Width2-slot2-slot
Recommended system power (PSU)no data500 Watt
Supplementary power connectors1 x 6-pin, 1 x 8-pin2x 6-pin
SLI options-+
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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
High bandwidth memory (HBM)-no data
Maximum RAM amount0 MB4 GB
Memory bus width512 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1050 MHz7.0 GB/s
Memory bandwidth384 GB/s224 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 DisplayPortDual Link DVI-I, HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.2
Multi monitor supportno data4 displays
Eyefinity+-
Number of Eyefinity displays6no data
VGA аnalog display supportno data+
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) supportno data+
HDMI++
HDCP-+
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536
DisplayPort support+-
G-SYNC support-+
Audio input for HDMIno dataInternal

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
GameStream-+
GeForce ShadowPlay-+
GPU Boostno data2.0
GameWorks-+
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder-+
Optimus-+
BatteryBoost-+

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212 (12_1)
Shader Model6.36.4
OpenGL4.64.5
OpenCL2.01.2
Vulkan+1.1.126
Mantle+-
CUDA-+

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 390X 23.54
GTX 980 27.80
+18.1%

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 390X 9408
GTX 980 11109
+18.1%

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.

R9 390X 17944
+1.9%
GTX 980 17605

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.

R9 390X 35807
GTX 980 37997
+6.1%

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 390X 12389
GTX 980 12938
+4.4%

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.

R9 390X 74351
GTX 980 85374
+14.8%

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.

R9 390X 318024
GTX 980 323076
+1.6%

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 HD90
−2.2%
92
+2.2%
1440p40−45
−25%
50
+25%
4K51
+27.5%
40
−27.5%

Cost per frame, $

1080p4.77
+25.2%
5.97
−25.2%
1440p10.73
+2.4%
10.98
−2.4%
4K8.41
+63.2%
13.73
−63.2%
  • R9 390X has 25% lower cost per frame in 1080p
  • R9 390X and GTX 980 have nearly equal cost per frame in 1440p
  • R9 390X has 63% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 45−50
−24.4%
55−60
+24.4%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
−20%
60−65
+20%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 75−80
+0%
75
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 45−50
−24.4%
55−60
+24.4%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
−20%
60−65
+20%
Forza Horizon 4 100−110
−22.4%
130−140
+22.4%
Forza Horizon 5 65−70
−16.9%
75−80
+16.9%
Metro Exodus 60−65
−15.6%
70−75
+15.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2 50−55
−13%
60−65
+13%
Valorant 95−100
−17.3%
110−120
+17.3%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 75−80
−2.7%
77
+2.7%
Counter-Strike 2 45−50
−24.4%
55−60
+24.4%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
−20%
60−65
+20%
Dota 2 85−90
+77.1%
48
−77.1%
Far Cry 5 75−80
−9.2%
80−85
+9.2%
Fortnite 120−130
+17.1%
105
−17.1%
Forza Horizon 4 100−110
−22.4%
130−140
+22.4%
Forza Horizon 5 65−70
−16.9%
75−80
+16.9%
Grand Theft Auto V 80−85
+16.7%
72
−16.7%
Metro Exodus 60−65
−15.6%
70−75
+15.6%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 150−160
−25.2%
194
+25.2%
Red Dead Redemption 2 50−55
−13%
60−65
+13%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 78
+16.4%
67
−16.4%
Valorant 95−100
−17.3%
110−120
+17.3%
World of Tanks 250−260
−6.3%
270−280
+6.3%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 75−80
+11.9%
67
−11.9%
Counter-Strike 2 45−50
−24.4%
55−60
+24.4%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
−20%
60−65
+20%
Dota 2 85−90
−14.1%
95−100
+14.1%
Far Cry 5 75−80
−9.2%
80−85
+9.2%
Forza Horizon 4 100−110
−22.4%
130−140
+22.4%
Forza Horizon 5 65−70
−16.9%
75−80
+16.9%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 150−160
+125%
69
−125%
Valorant 95−100
−17.3%
110−120
+17.3%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 40−45
−22%
50−55
+22%
Grand Theft Auto V 40−45
−24.4%
50−55
+24.4%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
−22.7%
27−30
+22.7%
World of Tanks 160−170
−16%
180−190
+16%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 45−50
+4.3%
47
−4.3%
Counter-Strike 2 21−24
−13.6%
24−27
+13.6%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
−23.8%
24−27
+23.8%
Far Cry 5 70−75
−23.9%
85−90
+23.9%
Forza Horizon 4 65−70
−21.5%
75−80
+21.5%
Forza Horizon 5 35−40
−20.5%
45−50
+20.5%
Metro Exodus 55−60
−16.1%
65−70
+16.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
−25%
45−50
+25%
Valorant 65−70
−22.7%
80−85
+22.7%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 20−22
−5%
21−24
+5%
Dota 2 40−45
−40.5%
59
+40.5%
Grand Theft Auto V 40−45
−40.5%
59
+40.5%
Metro Exodus 18−20
−21.1%
21−24
+21.1%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 75−80
+7.1%
70
−7.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
−20%
18−20
+20%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 40−45
−40.5%
59
+40.5%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27
+13.6%
22
−13.6%
Counter-Strike 2 20−22
−5%
21−24
+5%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
−37.5%
10−12
+37.5%
Dota 2 40−45
−23.8%
50−55
+23.8%
Far Cry 5 30−35
−21.9%
35−40
+21.9%
Fortnite 30−33
+0%
30
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
−18.4%
45−50
+18.4%
Forza Horizon 5 21−24
−19%
24−27
+19%
Valorant 30−35
−25%
40−45
+25%

This is how R9 390X and GTX 980 compete in popular games:

  • GTX 980 is 2% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 980 is 25% faster in 1440p
  • R9 390X is 28% faster in 4K

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

  • in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the R9 390X is 125% faster.
  • in Dota 2, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the GTX 980 is 40% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • R9 390X is ahead in 9 tests (14%)
  • GTX 980 is ahead in 52 tests (81%)
  • there's a draw in 3 tests (5%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 23.54 27.80
Recency 18 June 2015 19 September 2014
Power consumption (TDP) 275 Watt 165 Watt

R9 390X has an age advantage of 8 months.

GTX 980, on the other hand, has a 18.1% higher aggregate performance score, and 66.7% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 980 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R9 390X 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 390X
Radeon R9 390X
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980
GeForce GTX 980

Other comparisons

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.


4.3 266 votes

Rate Radeon R9 390X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2 1527 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 980 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.