FirePro D300 vs Radeon R9 M395X

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 M395X with FirePro D300, including specs and performance data.

R9 M395X
2015
4 GB GDDR5, 250 Watt
12.99
+34.3%

R9 M395X outperforms D300 by a substantial 34% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking396465
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency12.254.56
ArchitectureGCN 3.0 (2014−2019)GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)
GPU code nameAmethystPitcairn
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date5 May 2015 (9 years ago)18 January 2014 (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 cores20481280
Core clock speed723 MHz850 MHz
Number of transistors5,000 million2,800 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Watt150 Watt
Texture fill rate92.5468.00
Floating-point processing power2.961 TFLOPS2.176 TFLOPS
ROPs3232
TMUs12880

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 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data242 mm
Widthno data1-slot
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 GB2 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1250 MHz1270 MHz
Memory bandwidth160.0 GB/s162.6 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 outputs4x DisplayPort
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® 1212 (11_1)
Shader Model6.35.1
OpenGL4.44.6
OpenCLNot Listed1.2
Vulkan-1.2.131
Mantle+-

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

Counter-Strike 2 70−75
+40%
50−55
−40%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+44.4%
18−20
−44.4%
Hogwarts Legacy 21−24
+43.8%
16−18
−43.8%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 55−60
+37.5%
40−45
−37.5%
Counter-Strike 2 70−75
+40%
50−55
−40%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+44.4%
18−20
−44.4%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+40%
30−33
−40%
Fortnite 70−75
+46%
50−55
−46%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+35%
40−45
−35%
Forza Horizon 5 40−45
+48.1%
27−30
−48.1%
Hogwarts Legacy 21−24
+43.8%
16−18
−43.8%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+53.3%
30−33
−53.3%
Valorant 110−120
+37.5%
80−85
−37.5%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 55−60
+37.5%
40−45
−37.5%
Counter-Strike 2 70−75
+40%
50−55
−40%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 170−180
+36.9%
130−140
−36.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+44.4%
18−20
−44.4%
Dota 2 80−85
+40%
60−65
−40%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+40%
30−33
−40%
Fortnite 70−75
+46%
50−55
−46%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+35%
40−45
−35%
Forza Horizon 5 40−45
+48.1%
27−30
−48.1%
Grand Theft Auto V 45−50
+37.1%
35−40
−37.1%
Hogwarts Legacy 21−24
+43.8%
16−18
−43.8%
Metro Exodus 24−27
+44.4%
18−20
−44.4%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+53.3%
30−33
−53.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+37.5%
24−27
−37.5%
Valorant 110−120
+37.5%
80−85
−37.5%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 55−60
+37.5%
40−45
−37.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+44.4%
18−20
−44.4%
Dota 2 80−85
+40%
60−65
−40%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+40%
30−33
−40%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+35%
40−45
−35%
Hogwarts Legacy 21−24
+43.8%
16−18
−43.8%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+53.3%
30−33
−53.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+37.5%
24−27
−37.5%
Valorant 110−120
+37.5%
80−85
−37.5%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 70−75
+46%
50−55
−46%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+50%
16−18
−50%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 95−100
+35.7%
70−75
−35.7%
Grand Theft Auto V 20−22
+42.9%
14−16
−42.9%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+50%
10−11
−50%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 110−120
+42.5%
80−85
−42.5%
Valorant 130−140
+35%
100−105
−35%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 30−35
+41.7%
24−27
−41.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+37.5%
8−9
−37.5%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+50%
18−20
−50%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+47.6%
21−24
−47.6%
Hogwarts Legacy 14−16
+40%
10−11
−40%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+50%
12−14
−50%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 27−30
+50%
18−20
−50%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+60%
5−6
−60%
Grand Theft Auto V 24−27
+50%
16−18
−50%
Hogwarts Legacy 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%
Metro Exodus 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+60%
10−11
−60%
Valorant 65−70
+36%
50−55
−36%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 16−18
+41.7%
12−14
−41.7%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+60%
5−6
−60%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Dota 2 45−50
+53.3%
30−33
−53.3%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+44.4%
9−10
−44.4%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+37.5%
16−18
−37.5%
Hogwarts Legacy 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+50%
8−9
−50%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 12−14
+50%
8−9
−50%

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 12.99 9.67
Recency 5 May 2015 18 January 2014
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 2 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 250 Watt 150 Watt

R9 M395X has a 34.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, and a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

FirePro D300, on the other hand, has 66.7% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R9 M395X is our recommended choice as it beats the FirePro D300 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R9 M395X is a notebook card while FirePro D300 is a workstation one.

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 M395X
Radeon R9 M395X
AMD FirePro D300
FirePro D300

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.


4.1 18 votes

Rate Radeon R9 M395X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 32 votes

Rate FirePro D300 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R9 M395X or FirePro D300, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.