FirePro W9000 vs Radeon R9 M395

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 M395 with FirePro W9000, including specs and performance data.

R9 M395
2015
4 GB GDDR5
11.64

W9000 outperforms R9 M395 by a significant 26% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking453395
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.40
Power efficiencyno data4.13
ArchitectureGCN (2012−2015)GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)
GPU code nameno dataTahiti
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date9 June 2015 (10 years ago)14 June 2012 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$3,999

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

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 cores17922048
Core clock speed834 MHz975 MHz
Number of transistors5000 Million4,313 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data350 Watt
Texture fill rateno data124.8
Floating-point processing powerno data3.994 TFLOPS
ROPsno data32
TMUsno data128
L1 Cacheno data512 KB
L2 Cacheno data768 KB

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 3.0PCIe 3.0
Interfaceno dataPCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data279 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Form factorno datafull height / full length
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin

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 GB6 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit384 Bit
Memory clock speed1250 MHz1375 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data264 GB/s
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display Connectorsno data6x mini-DisplayPort, 1x SDI
Eyefinity+-
StereoOutput3D-+
Dual-link DVI support-+

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 support

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212 (11_1)
Shader Modelno data5.1
OpenGL4.44.6
OpenCLNot Listed1.2
Vulkan+1.2.131
Mantle+-

Synthetic benchmarks

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.

R9 M395 11.64
FirePro W9000 14.69
+26.2%

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 M395 4869
Samples: 51
FirePro W9000 6144
+26.2%
Samples: 16

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

Counter-Strike 2 65−70
−23.1%
80−85
+23.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
−25%
30−33
+25%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 24−27
−25%
30−33
+25%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 50−55
−25%
65−70
+25%
Counter-Strike 2 65−70
−23.1%
80−85
+23.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
−25%
30−33
+25%
Far Cry 5 35−40
−18.4%
45−50
+18.4%
Fortnite 65−70
−23.2%
85−90
+23.2%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
−20%
60−65
+20%
Forza Horizon 5 35−40
−25%
45−50
+25%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
−16.3%
50−55
+16.3%
Valorant 100−110
−22.6%
130−140
+22.6%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 50−55
−25%
65−70
+25%
Counter-Strike 2 65−70
−23.1%
80−85
+23.1%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 160−170
−24.3%
210−220
+24.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
−25%
30−33
+25%
Dota 2 80−85
−25%
100−105
+25%
Far Cry 5 35−40
−18.4%
45−50
+18.4%
Fortnite 65−70
−23.2%
85−90
+23.2%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
−20%
60−65
+20%
Forza Horizon 5 35−40
−25%
45−50
+25%
Grand Theft Auto V 40−45
−25%
55−60
+25%
Metro Exodus 24−27
−25%
30−33
+25%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
−16.3%
50−55
+16.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
−12.9%
35−40
+12.9%
Valorant 100−110
−22.6%
130−140
+22.6%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 50−55
−25%
65−70
+25%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
−25%
30−33
+25%
Dota 2 80−85
−25%
100−105
+25%
Far Cry 5 35−40
−18.4%
45−50
+18.4%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
−20%
60−65
+20%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
−16.3%
50−55
+16.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
−12.9%
35−40
+12.9%
Valorant 100−110
−22.6%
130−140
+22.6%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 65−70
−23.2%
85−90
+23.2%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 21−24
−22.7%
27−30
+22.7%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 85−90
−23.6%
110−120
+23.6%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
−23.5%
21−24
+23.5%
Metro Exodus 14−16
−14.3%
16−18
+14.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 80−85
−19%
100−105
+19%
Valorant 120−130
−26%
160−170
+26%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 30−35
−25%
40−45
+25%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
−20%
12−14
+20%
Far Cry 5 24−27
−20%
30−33
+20%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
−25%
35−40
+25%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
−23.5%
21−24
+23.5%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 24−27
−15.4%
30−33
+15.4%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
Grand Theft Auto V 21−24
−17.4%
27−30
+17.4%
Metro Exodus 8−9
−25%
10−11
+25%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
−20%
18−20
+20%
Valorant 60−65
−19%
75−80
+19%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 16−18
−12.5%
18−20
+12.5%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
Dota 2 40−45
−16.3%
50−55
+16.3%
Far Cry 5 12−14
−16.7%
14−16
+16.7%
Forza Horizon 4 20−22
−20%
24−27
+20%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−12
−9.1%
12−14
+9.1%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 10−12
−9.1%
12−14
+9.1%

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 11.64 14.69
Recency 9 June 2015 14 June 2012
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 6 GB

R9 M395 has an age advantage of 2 years.

FirePro W9000, on the other hand, has a 26% higher aggregate performance score, and a 50% higher maximum VRAM amount.

The FirePro W9000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R9 M395 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R9 M395 is a notebook graphics card while FirePro W9000 is a workstation one.

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.


3.4 25 votes

Rate Radeon R9 M395 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 5 votes

Rate FirePro W9000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R9 M395 or FirePro W9000, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.