Radeon 780M vs R9 M485X
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon R9 M485X with Radeon 780M, including specs and performance data.
780M outperforms R9 M485X by an impressive 90% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 517 | 349 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 47 |
| Power efficiency | 2.66 | 84.16 |
| Architecture | GCN 3.0 (2014−2019) | RDNA 3.0 (2022−2025) |
| GPU code name | Amethyst | Phoenix |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 15 May 2016 (9 years ago) | 31 January 2024 (1 year 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 cores | 2048 | 768 |
| Core clock speed | 723 MHz | 800 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 2900 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 5,000 million | 25,390 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 4 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 250 Watt | 15 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 92.54 | 139.2 |
| Floating-point processing power | 2.961 TFLOPS | 8.909 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 32 | 32 |
| TMUs | 128 | 48 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 12 |
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 |
| Interface | MXM-B (3.0) | PCIe 4.0 x8 |
| Width | no data | IGP |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | None |
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 | 8 GB | System Shared |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | System Shared |
| Memory clock speed | 1250 MHz | System Shared |
| Memory bandwidth | 160.0 GB/s | no data |
| 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 Connectors | No outputs | Motherboard Dependent |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_0) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 6.3 | 6.8 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | 2.1 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | 1.3 |
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.
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.
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 | 18−20
−94.4%
| 35
+94.4%
|
| 1440p | 10−12
−120%
| 22
+120%
|
| 4K | 6−7
−117%
| 13
+117%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 45−50
−153%
|
119
+153%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 18−20
−117%
|
39
+117%
|
| God of War | 18−20
−106%
|
37
+106%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 35−40
−84.6%
|
70−75
+84.6%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 45−50
−74.5%
|
82
+74.5%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 18−20
−72.2%
|
31
+72.2%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 27−30
−55.2%
|
45
+55.2%
|
| Fortnite | 50−55
−70.4%
|
90−95
+70.4%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 35−40
−76.9%
|
65−70
+76.9%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 27−30
−141%
|
65
+141%
|
| God of War | 18−20
−66.7%
|
30
+66.7%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 30−35
−96.9%
|
60−65
+96.9%
|
| Valorant | 85−90
−52.9%
|
130−140
+52.9%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 35−40
−84.6%
|
70−75
+84.6%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 45−50
+20.5%
|
39
−20.5%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 130−140
−56.9%
|
210−220
+56.9%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 18−20
−33.3%
|
24
+33.3%
|
| Dota 2 | 65−70
−55.4%
|
100−110
+55.4%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 27−30
−41.4%
|
41
+41.4%
|
| Fortnite | 50−55
−70.4%
|
90−95
+70.4%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 35−40
−76.9%
|
65−70
+76.9%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 27−30
−122%
|
60
+122%
|
| God of War | 18−20
−33.3%
|
24
+33.3%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 30−35
−33.3%
|
44
+33.3%
|
| Metro Exodus | 18−20
−61.1%
|
29
+61.1%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 30−35
−96.9%
|
60−65
+96.9%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 21−24
−100%
|
46
+100%
|
| Valorant | 85−90
−52.9%
|
130−140
+52.9%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 35−40
−84.6%
|
70−75
+84.6%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 18−20
−27.8%
|
23
+27.8%
|
| Dota 2 | 65−70
−55.4%
|
100−110
+55.4%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 27−30
−34.5%
|
39
+34.5%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 35−40
−76.9%
|
65−70
+76.9%
|
| God of War | 18−20
+0%
|
18
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 30−35
−96.9%
|
60−65
+96.9%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 21−24
−26.1%
|
29
+26.1%
|
| Valorant | 85−90
−52.9%
|
130−140
+52.9%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 50−55
−70.4%
|
90−95
+70.4%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 16−18
−68.8%
|
27
+68.8%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 65−70
−82.4%
|
120−130
+82.4%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 12−14
−50%
|
18
+50%
|
| Metro Exodus | 10−11
−110%
|
21−24
+110%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 45−50
−245%
|
160−170
+245%
|
| Valorant | 95−100
−66.7%
|
160−170
+66.7%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 21−24
−129%
|
45−50
+129%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 7−8
−129%
|
16
+129%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 18−20
−50%
|
27
+50%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 21−24
−100%
|
40−45
+100%
|
| God of War | 9−10
−111%
|
18−20
+111%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 12−14
−66.7%
|
20
+66.7%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 18−20
−100%
|
35−40
+100%
|
4K
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4
−100%
|
6
+100%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 20−22
−5%
|
21
+5%
|
| Metro Exodus | 4−5
−225%
|
12−14
+225%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 9−10
−66.7%
|
15
+66.7%
|
| Valorant | 45−50
−107%
|
95−100
+107%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 10−11
−150%
|
24−27
+150%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4
−333%
|
12−14
+333%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−100%
|
6
+100%
|
| Dota 2 | 30−35
−84.4%
|
55−60
+84.4%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 9−10
−33.3%
|
12
+33.3%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 14−16
−93.3%
|
27−30
+93.3%
|
| God of War | 7−8
−85.7%
|
12−14
+85.7%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−113%
|
16−18
+113%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 8−9
−113%
|
16−18
+113%
|
This is how R9 M485X and Radeon 780M compete in popular games:
- Radeon 780M is 94% faster in 1080p
- Radeon 780M is 120% faster in 1440p
- Radeon 780M is 117% faster in 4K
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Counter-Strike 2, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the R9 M485X is 21% faster.
- in Counter-Strike 2, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Radeon 780M is 333% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- R9 M485X performs better in 1 test (2%)
- Radeon 780M performs better in 63 tests (97%)
- there's a draw in 1 test (2%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 8.73 | 16.58 |
| Recency | 15 May 2016 | 31 January 2024 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 4 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 250 Watt | 15 Watt |
Radeon 780M has a 89.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 600% more advanced lithography process, and 1566.7% lower power consumption.
The Radeon 780M is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R9 M485X in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon R9 M485X is a notebook graphics card while Radeon 780M 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.
