GeForce GT 750M SLI vs Radeon R9 M380

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 M380 and GeForce GT 750M SLI, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

R9 M380
2015
4 GB GDDR5
7.17
+3.9%

R9 M380 outperforms GT 750M SLI by a minimal 4% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking551566
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
ArchitectureGCN 2.0 (2013−2017)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameStratoN14P-GT
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date5 May 2015 (9 years ago)1 April 2013 (11 years ago)

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 cores768768
Core clock speed900 MHz967 MHz
Boost clock speed1000 MHzno data
Number of transistors2,080 million1300 Million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Texture fill rate48.00no data
Floating-point processing power1.536 TFLOPSno data
ROPs16no data
TMUs48no 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 sizemedium sizedlarge
Bus supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16no 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 typeGDDR5DDR3, GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount4 GB2x 2 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit2x 128 Bit
Memory clock speed1500 MHz2000 - 5000 MHz
Memory bandwidth96 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 ConnectorsNo outputsno data
Eyefinity+-

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync+-
HD3D+-
PowerTune+-
DualGraphics+-
TrueAudio+-
ZeroCore+-
Switchable graphics+-

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1211
Shader Model6.3no data
OpenGL4.4no data
OpenCLNot Listedno data
Mantle+-
CUDA-+

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 HD55−60
−3.6%
57
+3.6%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+7.7%
12−14
−7.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+7.7%
12−14
−7.7%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Battlefield 5 27−30
+3.6%
27−30
−3.6%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+7.7%
12−14
−7.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+7.7%
12−14
−7.7%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+5%
20−22
−5%
Fortnite 40−45
+5.1%
35−40
−5.1%
Forza Horizon 4 30−33
+3.4%
27−30
−3.4%
Forza Horizon 5 16−18
+6.7%
14−16
−6.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
+4.2%
24−27
−4.2%
Valorant 70−75
+1.4%
70−75
−1.4%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Battlefield 5 27−30
+3.6%
27−30
−3.6%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+7.7%
12−14
−7.7%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 110−120
−48.2%
163
+48.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+7.7%
12−14
−7.7%
Dota 2 50−55
+1.9%
50−55
−1.9%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+5%
20−22
−5%
Fortnite 40−45
+5.1%
35−40
−5.1%
Forza Horizon 4 30−33
+3.4%
27−30
−3.4%
Forza Horizon 5 16−18
+6.7%
14−16
−6.7%
Grand Theft Auto V 24−27
+4.2%
24−27
−4.2%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+8.3%
12−14
−8.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
+4.2%
24−27
−4.2%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+5.9%
16−18
−5.9%
Valorant 70−75
+1.4%
70−75
−1.4%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 27−30
+3.6%
27−30
−3.6%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+7.7%
12−14
−7.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+7.7%
12−14
−7.7%
Dota 2 50−55
+1.9%
50−55
−1.9%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+5%
20−22
−5%
Forza Horizon 4 30−33
+3.4%
27−30
−3.4%
Forza Horizon 5 16−18
+6.7%
14−16
−6.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
+4.2%
24−27
−4.2%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+5.9%
16−18
−5.9%
Valorant 70−75
+1.4%
70−75
−1.4%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 40−45
+5.1%
35−40
−5.1%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 50−55
+4%
50−55
−4%
Grand Theft Auto V 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Metro Exodus 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+2.6%
35−40
−2.6%
Valorant 75−80
+4.1%
70−75
−4.1%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14
+9.1%
10−12
−9.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+7.7%
12−14
−7.7%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+6.7%
14−16
−6.7%
Forza Horizon 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 14−16
+7.7%
12−14
−7.7%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Counter-Strike 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Metro Exodus 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Valorant 30−35
+3%
30−35
−3%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Counter-Strike 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 24−27
+4.3%
21−24
−4.3%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%

This is how R9 M380 and GT 750M SLI compete in popular games:

  • GT 750M SLI is 4% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Metro Exodus, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the R9 M380 is 100% faster.
  • in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the GT 750M SLI is 48% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • R9 M380 is ahead in 50 tests (75%)
  • GT 750M SLI is ahead in 1 test (1%)
  • there's a draw in 16 tests (24%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 7.17 6.90
Recency 5 May 2015 1 April 2013

R9 M380 has a 3.9% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 2 years.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Radeon R9 M380 and GeForce GT 750M SLI.

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 M380
Radeon R9 M380
NVIDIA GeForce GT 750M SLI
GeForce GT 750M SLI

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.


3.6 11 votes

Rate Radeon R9 M380 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 16 votes

Rate GeForce GT 750M SLI on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R9 M380 or GeForce GT 750M SLI, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.