Iris Plus Graphics vs Radeon R9 M390
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon R9 M390 with Iris Plus Graphics, including specs and performance data.
R9 M390 outperforms Iris Plus Graphics by a whopping 106% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 468 | 657 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 21.63 |
| Architecture | GCN (2012−2015) | Generation 11.0 (2019−2021) |
| GPU code name | Pitcairn | Ice Lake GT2 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 9 June 2015 (9 years ago) | 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 cores | 1024 | 512 |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 1000 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 5000 Million | no data |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 10 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | no data | 15 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 32.00 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 1.024 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | no data | 8 |
| TMUs | no data | 32 |
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 | large | no data |
| Bus support | PCIe 3.0 | no data |
| Interface | no data | PCIe 3.0 x1 |
| Width | no data | IGP |
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 | System Shared |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | System Shared |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | System Shared |
| Memory clock speed | no data | System Shared |
| Shared memory | - | no data |
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 | no data | No 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 and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | DirectX® 12 | 12 (12_1) |
| OpenGL | 4.4 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | Not Listed | no data |
| Mantle | + | - |
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 HD | 44
+110%
| 21−24
−110%
|
| 4K | 21
+110%
| 10−12
−110%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 16−18
+113%
|
8−9
−113%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 18−20
+111%
|
9−10
−111%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 30−35
+121%
|
14−16
−121%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 16−18
+113%
|
8−9
−113%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 18−20
+111%
|
9−10
−111%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 35−40
+111%
|
18−20
−111%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 24−27
+140%
|
10−11
−140%
|
| Metro Exodus | 24−27
+117%
|
12−14
−117%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 24−27
+117%
|
12−14
−117%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
+106%
|
18−20
−106%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 30−35
+121%
|
14−16
−121%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 16−18
+113%
|
8−9
−113%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 18−20
+111%
|
9−10
−111%
|
| Dota 2 | 22
+120%
|
10−11
−120%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 35−40
+117%
|
18−20
−117%
|
| Fortnite | 55−60
+107%
|
27−30
−107%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 35−40
+111%
|
18−20
−111%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 24−27
+140%
|
10−11
−140%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 34
+113%
|
16−18
−113%
|
| Metro Exodus | 24−27
+117%
|
12−14
−117%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 75−80
+114%
|
35−40
−114%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 24−27
+117%
|
12−14
−117%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 33
+106%
|
16−18
−106%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
+106%
|
18−20
−106%
|
| World of Tanks | 140−150
+115%
|
65−70
−115%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 30−35
+121%
|
14−16
−121%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 16−18
+113%
|
8−9
−113%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 18−20
+111%
|
9−10
−111%
|
| Dota 2 | 30−35
+113%
|
16−18
−113%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 35−40
+117%
|
18−20
−117%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 35−40
+111%
|
18−20
−111%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 24−27
+140%
|
10−11
−140%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 75−80
+114%
|
35−40
−114%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
+106%
|
18−20
−106%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Dota 2 | 12−14
+140%
|
5−6
−140%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 12−14
+117%
|
6−7
−117%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 45−50
+114%
|
21−24
−114%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 8−9
+167%
|
3−4
−167%
|
| World of Tanks | 65−70
+130%
|
30−33
−130%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 18−20
+125%
|
8−9
−125%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 4−5
+300%
|
1−2
−300%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 8−9
+167%
|
3−4
−167%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 21−24
+110%
|
10−11
−110%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 21−24
+120%
|
10−11
−120%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 14−16
+114%
|
7−8
−114%
|
| Metro Exodus | 18−20
+125%
|
8−9
−125%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 12−14
+117%
|
6−7
−117%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
+140%
|
10−11
−140%
|
4K
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
| Dota 2 | 20−22
+122%
|
9−10
−122%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 20−22
+122%
|
9−10
−122%
|
| Metro Exodus | 5−6
+150%
|
2−3
−150%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 27−30
+133%
|
12−14
−133%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 6−7
+200%
|
2−3
−200%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 20−22
+122%
|
9−10
−122%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 8−9
+167%
|
3−4
−167%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
| Dota 2 | 20−22
+122%
|
9−10
−122%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 12−14
+140%
|
5−6
−140%
|
| Fortnite | 10−11
+150%
|
4−5
−150%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 12−14
+140%
|
5−6
−140%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 7−8
+133%
|
3−4
−133%
|
| Valorant | 10−11
+150%
|
4−5
−150%
|
This is how R9 M390 and Iris Plus Graphics compete in popular games:
- R9 M390 is 110% faster in 1080p
- R9 M390 is 110% faster in 4K
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 9.29 | 4.52 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 10 nm |
R9 M390 has a 105.5% higher aggregate performance score.
Iris Plus Graphics, on the other hand, has a 180% more advanced lithography process.
The Radeon R9 M390 is our recommended choice as it beats the Iris Plus Graphics in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon R9 M390 is a notebook card while Iris Plus Graphics is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
