Radeon R9 M275 vs R9 M385X

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 M385X and Radeon R9 M275, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

R9 M385X
2015
4 GB GDDR5
5.17
+78.9%

R9 M385X outperforms R9 M275 by an impressive 79% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking618785
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.14
ArchitectureGCN 2.0 (2013−2017)GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)
GPU code nameStratoVenus
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date5 May 2015 (9 years ago)28 January 2014 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$799.99

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores896640
Core clock speed1000 MHz900 MHz
Boost clock speed1100 MHz925 MHz
Number of transistors2,080 million1,500 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Texture fill rate61.6037.00
Floating-point processing power1.971 TFLOPS1.184 TFLOPS
ROPs1616
TMUs5640

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 sizelargelarge
Bus supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16

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
Maximum RAM amount4 GB2 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1500 MHz1000 MHz
Memory bandwidth76.8 GB/s64 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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs
Eyefinity+-

Supported technologies

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

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

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212 (11_1)
Shader Model6.35.1
OpenGL4.44.6
OpenCLNot Listed1.2
Vulkan-1.2.131
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 M385X 5.17
+78.9%
R9 M275 2.89

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 M385X 1993
+78.9%
R9 M275 1114

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 M385X 5515
+69.1%
R9 M275 3261

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 M385X 3405
+80.6%
R9 M275 1885

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 M385X 22544
+96.7%
R9 M275 11459

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 HD27
+12.5%
24
−12.5%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data33.33

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16
+55.6%
9−10
−55.6%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Battlefield 5 12−14
+160%
5−6
−160%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−12
+57.1%
7−8
−57.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+120%
5−6
−120%
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16
+75%
8−9
−75%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+120%
14−16
−120%
Hitman 3 10−12
+37.5%
8−9
−37.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
+50%
21−24
−50%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+300%
3−4
−300%
Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+100%
7−8
−100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 18−20
+50%
12−14
−50%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
+20.5%
35−40
−20.5%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16
+55.6%
9−10
−55.6%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Battlefield 5 12−14
+160%
5−6
−160%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−12
+57.1%
7−8
−57.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+120%
5−6
−120%
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16
+75%
8−9
−75%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+120%
14−16
−120%
Hitman 3 10−12
+37.5%
8−9
−37.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
+50%
21−24
−50%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+300%
3−4
−300%
Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+100%
7−8
−100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 18−20
+50%
12−14
−50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 41
+193%
14−16
−193%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
+20.5%
35−40
−20.5%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16
+55.6%
9−10
−55.6%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−12
+57.1%
7−8
−57.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+120%
5−6
−120%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+120%
14−16
−120%
Hitman 3 10−12
+37.5%
8−9
−37.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
+50%
21−24
−50%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 18−20
+50%
12−14
−50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+28.6%
14−16
−28.6%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
+20.5%
35−40
−20.5%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+100%
7−8
−100%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 10−11
+100%
5−6
−100%
Far Cry New Dawn 8−9
+100%
4−5
−100%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+100%
3−4
−100%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+100%
6−7
−100%
Hitman 3 9−10
+12.5%
8−9
−12.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
+71.4%
7−8
−71.4%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+94.1%
16−18
−94.1%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Hitman 3 1−2 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
+100%
4−5
−100%
Metro Exodus 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%

This is how R9 M385X and R9 M275 compete in popular games:

  • R9 M385X is 13% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Assassin's Creed Valhalla, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the R9 M385X is 400% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • R9 M385X is ahead in 60 tests (98%)
  • there's a draw in 1 test (2%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 5.17 2.89
Recency 5 May 2015 28 January 2014
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 2 GB

R9 M385X has a 78.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, and a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

The Radeon R9 M385X is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R9 M275 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 M385X
Radeon R9 M385X
AMD Radeon R9 M275
Radeon R9 M275

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.


3.5 4 votes

Rate Radeon R9 M385X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 4 votes

Rate Radeon R9 M275 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.