Radeon 760M vs R9 390X

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 390X with Radeon 760M, including specs and performance data.

R9 390X
2015
0 MB GDDR5, 275 Watt
24.44
+59.7%

R9 390X outperforms Radeon 760M by an impressive 60% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking206326
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation12.62no data
ArchitectureGCN (2011−2017)RDNA 3
GPU code nameGrenada XTPhoenix
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Designreferenceno data
Release date16 June 2015 (9 years ago)5 January 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$429 no data
Current price$19.99 (0x MSRP)no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores2816512
Core clock speedno data1500 MHz
Boost clock speed1050 MHz2800 MHz
Number of transistors6,200 million25,390 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm4 nm
Power consumption (TDP)275 Watt54 Watt (35 - 54 Watt TGP)
Texture fill rate184.867.20
Floating-point performance5,914 gflopsno data

Form factor & compatibility

Information on Radeon R9 390X and Radeon 760M 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.

Bus supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x8
Length275 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1 x 6-pin, 1 x 8-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 typeGDDR5System Shared
High bandwidth memory (HBM)-no data
Maximum RAM amount0 MBSystem Shared
Memory bus width512 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1050 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth384 GB/sno 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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPortPortable Device Dependent
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
FreeSync1no data
HD3D-no 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 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.36.7
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.02.1
Vulkan+1.3
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 390X 24.44
+59.7%
Radeon 760M 15.30

R9 390X outperforms 760M by 60% 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 390X 9439
+59.7%
Radeon 760M 5910

R9 390X outperforms 760M by 60% 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 390X 17944
+86.9%
Radeon 760M 9603

R9 390X outperforms 760M by 87% 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 390X 35807
+8.6%
Radeon 760M 32985

R9 390X outperforms 760M by 9% 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 390X 12389
+102%
Radeon 760M 6142

R9 390X outperforms 760M by 102% 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 390X 74351
+78%
Radeon 760M 41767

R9 390X outperforms 760M by 78% in 3DMark Cloud Gate 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 HD86
+177%
31
−177%
4K47
+74.1%
27−30
−74.1%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
+50%
30
−50%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 45−50
+45.2%
30−35
−45.2%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 35−40
+40%
24−27
−40%
Battlefield 5 75−80
+50%
50−55
−50%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 45−50
+45.2%
30−35
−45.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+45.8%
24
−45.8%
Far Cry 5 55−60
+52.8%
35−40
−52.8%
Far Cry New Dawn 65−70
+54.8%
40−45
−54.8%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+52.8%
70−75
−52.8%
Hitman 3 45−50
+50%
30−33
−50%
Horizon Zero Dawn 95−100
+55.7%
60−65
−55.7%
Metro Exodus 80−85
+56.9%
50−55
−56.9%
Red Dead Redemption 2 65−70
+51.2%
40−45
−51.2%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 80−85
+56.9%
51
−56.9%
Watch Dogs: Legion 75−80
+53.1%
45−50
−53.1%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 45−50
+45.2%
30−35
−45.2%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 35−40
+40%
24−27
−40%
Battlefield 5 75−80
+50%
50−55
−50%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 45−50
+45.2%
30−35
−45.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+50%
18
−50%
Far Cry 5 55−60
+52.8%
35−40
−52.8%
Far Cry New Dawn 65−70
+54.8%
40−45
−54.8%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+52.8%
70−75
−52.8%
Hitman 3 45−50
+50%
30−33
−50%
Horizon Zero Dawn 95−100
+55.7%
60−65
−55.7%
Metro Exodus 80−85
+56.9%
50−55
−56.9%
Red Dead Redemption 2 65−70
+51.2%
40−45
−51.2%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 70−75
+59.1%
44
−59.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 55−60
+52.8%
36
−52.8%
Watch Dogs: Legion 75−80
+53.1%
45−50
−53.1%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 45−50
+45.2%
30−35
−45.2%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 35−40
+40%
24−27
−40%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 45−50
+45.2%
30−35
−45.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+45.8%
24−27
−45.8%
Far Cry 5 55−60
+52.8%
35−40
−52.8%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+52.8%
70−75
−52.8%
Horizon Zero Dawn 95−100
+55.7%
60−65
−55.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 55−60
+48.6%
37
−48.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
+52.2%
23
−52.2%
Watch Dogs: Legion 75−80
+53.1%
45−50
−53.1%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 65−70
+51.2%
40−45
−51.2%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 45−50
+50%
30−33
−50%
Far Cry New Dawn 40−45
+42.9%
27−30
−42.9%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 21−24
+40%
14−16
−40%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 18−20
+50%
12−14
−50%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−33
+57.9%
18−20
−57.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+50%
8−9
−50%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+40%
24−27
−40%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+55.2%
27−30
−55.2%
Hitman 3 27−30
+50%
18−20
−50%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50
+45.2%
30−35
−45.2%
Metro Exodus 40−45
+48.1%
27−30
−48.1%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 40−45
+42.9%
27−30
−42.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+50%
16−18
−50%
Watch Dogs: Legion 14−16
+40%
10−11
−40%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
+40%
24−27
−40%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
+40%
14−16
−40%
Far Cry New Dawn 16−18
+45.5%
10−12
−45.5%
Hitman 3 16−18
+45.5%
10−12
−45.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn 24−27
+50%
16−18
−50%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 14−16
+55.6%
9−10
−55.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+50%
14−16
−50%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16
+55.6%
9−10
−55.6%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−11
+42.9%
7−8
−42.9%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
+50%
8−9
−50%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+50%
8−9
−50%
Forza Horizon 4 30−33
+42.9%
21−24
−42.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn 24−27
+50%
16−18
−50%
Metro Exodus 21−24
+40%
14−16
−40%
Watch Dogs: Legion 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
+50%
14−16
−50%

This is how R9 390X and Radeon 760M compete in popular games:

  • R9 390X is 177% faster in 1080p
  • R9 390X is 74% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 24.44 15.30
Recency 16 June 2015 5 January 2023
Chip lithography 28 nm 4 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 275 Watt 54 Watt

The Radeon R9 390X is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon 760M in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R9 390X is a desktop card while Radeon 760M is a notebook 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 390X
Radeon R9 390X
AMD Radeon 760M
Radeon 760M

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.


4.3 242 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2 108 votes

Rate Radeon 760M 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.