GeForce GTX 780M Mac Edition vs Radeon R9 M390X

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 M390X and GeForce GTX 780M Mac Edition, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

R9 M390X
2015
4 GB GDDR5, 100 Watt
8.62
+49.1%

R9 M390X outperforms GTX 780M Mac Edition by a considerable 49% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking465580
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency9.113.75
ArchitectureGCN 3.0 (2014−2019)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameAmethystGK104
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date5 May 2015 (9 years ago)8 November 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 cores20481536
Core clock speed723 MHz771 MHz
Boost clock speedno data797 MHz
Number of transistors5,000 million3,540 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)100 Watt122 Watt
Texture fill rate92.54102.0
Floating-point processing power2.961 TFLOPS2.448 TFLOPS
ROPs3232
TMUs128128

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 sizelargeno data
Bus supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16MXM-B (3.0)
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno 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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount4 GB4 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speedno data1250 MHz
Memory bandwidth160.0 GB/s160.0 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 and SDK compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212 (11_0)
Shader Model6.35.1
OpenGL4.44.6
OpenCLNot Listed1.2
Vulkan+1.1.126
Mantle+-
CUDA-3.0

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 21−24
+64.3%
14−16
−64.3%
Counter-Strike 2 50−55
+66.7%
30−33
−66.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+58.3%
12−14
−58.3%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 21−24
+64.3%
14−16
−64.3%
Battlefield 5 40−45
+51.9%
27−30
−51.9%
Counter-Strike 2 50−55
+66.7%
30−33
−66.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+58.3%
12−14
−58.3%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+72.2%
18−20
−72.2%
Fortnite 55−60
+60%
35−40
−60%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+51.9%
27−30
−51.9%
Forza Horizon 5 27−30
+61.1%
18−20
−61.1%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+61.9%
21−24
−61.9%
Valorant 90−95
+50%
60−65
−50%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 21−24
+64.3%
14−16
−64.3%
Battlefield 5 40−45
+51.9%
27−30
−51.9%
Counter-Strike 2 50−55
+66.7%
30−33
−66.7%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 140−150
+49.5%
95−100
−49.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+58.3%
12−14
−58.3%
Dota 2 65−70
+51.1%
45−50
−51.1%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+72.2%
18−20
−72.2%
Fortnite 55−60
+60%
35−40
−60%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+51.9%
27−30
−51.9%
Forza Horizon 5 27−30
+61.1%
18−20
−61.1%
Grand Theft Auto V 35−40
+66.7%
21−24
−66.7%
Metro Exodus 18−20
+58.3%
12−14
−58.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+61.9%
21−24
−61.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+56.3%
16−18
−56.3%
Valorant 90−95
+50%
60−65
−50%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 40−45
+51.9%
27−30
−51.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+58.3%
12−14
−58.3%
Dota 2 65−70
+51.1%
45−50
−51.1%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+72.2%
18−20
−72.2%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+51.9%
27−30
−51.9%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+61.9%
21−24
−61.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+56.3%
16−18
−56.3%
Valorant 90−95
+50%
60−65
−50%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 55−60
+60%
35−40
−60%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+70%
10−11
−70%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 70−75
+60%
45−50
−60%
Grand Theft Auto V 12−14
+62.5%
8−9
−62.5%
Metro Exodus 10−11
+66.7%
6−7
−66.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+53.3%
30−33
−53.3%
Valorant 100−110
+50%
70−75
−50%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
+64.3%
14−16
−64.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+60%
5−6
−60%
Far Cry 5 20−22
+66.7%
12−14
−66.7%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+64.3%
14−16
−64.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+55.6%
9−10
−55.6%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 20−22
+66.7%
12−14
−66.7%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
Counter-Strike 2 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Grand Theft Auto V 20−22
+66.7%
12−14
−66.7%
Metro Exodus 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
+66.7%
6−7
−66.7%
Valorant 45−50
+63.3%
30−33
−63.3%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 10−12
+57.1%
7−8
−57.1%
Counter-Strike 2 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Dota 2 30−35
+61.9%
21−24
−61.9%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+66.7%
6−7
−66.7%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+60%
10−11
−60%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 8.62 5.78
Recency 5 May 2015 8 November 2013
Power consumption (TDP) 100 Watt 122 Watt

R9 M390X has a 49.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, and 22% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R9 M390X is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 780M Mac Edition in performance tests.

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 M390X
Radeon R9 M390X
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M Mac Edition
GeForce GTX 780M Mac Edition

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.


5 2 votes

Rate Radeon R9 M390X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.6 8 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 780M Mac Edition on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R9 M390X or GeForce GTX 780M Mac Edition, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.