Radeon R9 M390 vs RX 480

Place in the ranking	252	459
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	15.84	no data
Power efficiency	10.28	no data
Architecture	GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)	GCN (2012−2015)
GPU code name	Ellesmere	Pitcairn
GCN generation	4th Gen	no data
Market segment	Desktop	Laptop
Design	reference	no data
Release date	29 June 2016 (8 years ago)	9 June 2015 (9 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$229	no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

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	2304	1024
Compute units	36	no data
Core clock speed	1120 MHz	no data
Boost clock speed	1266 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	5,700 million	5000 Million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	150 Watt	no data
Texture fill rate	182.3	no data
Floating-point processing power	5.834 TFLOPS	no data
ROPs	32	no data
TMUs	144	no data

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	no data	large
Bus support	n/a	PCIe 3.0
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	no data
Length	241 mm	no data
Width	2-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	1x 6-pin	no data
Bridgeless CrossFire	+	-

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	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	2 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	8000 MHz	no data
Memory bandwidth	224 GB/s	no data
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 Connectors	1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort	no data
Eyefinity	+	+
HDMI	2.0	-
DisplayPort support	1.4HDR	-

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

AppAcceleration	n/a	-
CrossFire	+	-
Enduro	n/a	-
FRTC	+	-
FreeSync	+	+
HD3D	n/a	+
LiquidVR	+	-
PowerTune	+	+
DualGraphics	-	+
TressFX	+	-
TrueAudio	n/a	-
ZeroCore	+	+
Switchable graphics	-	+
UVD	+	-
VCE	+	-

API compatibility

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

DirectX	DirectX® 12	DirectX® 12
Shader Model	6.4	no data
OpenGL	4.5	4.4
OpenCL	2.0	Not Listed
Vulkan	+	-
Mantle	n/a	+

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

RX 480 22.36
+126%

R9 M390 9.91

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

RX 480 17919
+163%

R9 M390 6819

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	77 +75%	44 −75%
1440p	52 +148%	21−24 −148%
4K	35 +66.7%	21 −66.7%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	2.97	no data
1440p	4.40	no data
4K	6.54	no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	40−45 +135%	16−18 −135%
Cyberpunk 2077	45−50 +125%	20−22 −125%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	70−75 +119%	30−35 −119%
Counter-Strike 2	40−45 +135%	16−18 −135%
Cyberpunk 2077	45−50 +125%	20−22 −125%
Forza Horizon 4	95−100 +140%	40−45 −140%
Forza Horizon 5	55−60 +136%	24−27 −136%
Metro Exodus	60−65 +122%	27−30 −122%
Red Dead Redemption 2	50−55 +92.3%	24−27 −92.3%
Valorant	90−95 +137%	35−40 −137%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	70−75 +119%	30−35 −119%
Counter-Strike 2	40−45 +135%	16−18 −135%
Cyberpunk 2077	45−50 +125%	20−22 −125%
Dota 2	52 +136%	22 −136%
Far Cry 5	51 +24.4%	40−45 −24.4%
Fortnite	110−120 +98.3%	55−60 −98.3%
Forza Horizon 4	95−100 +140%	40−45 −140%
Forza Horizon 5	55−60 +136%	24−27 −136%
Grand Theft Auto V	78 +129%	34 −129%
Metro Exodus	16 −68.8%	27−30 +68.8%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	78 +1.3%	75−80 −1.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2	34 +30.8%	24−27 −30.8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	30 −10%	33 +10%
Valorant	90−95 +137%	35−40 −137%
World of Tanks	285 +99.3%	140−150 −99.3%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	70−75 +119%	30−35 −119%
Counter-Strike 2	29 +70.6%	16−18 −70.6%
Cyberpunk 2077	45−50 +125%	20−22 −125%
Dota 2	75−80 +117%	35−40 −117%
Far Cry 5	70−75 +75.6%	40−45 −75.6%
Forza Horizon 4	95−100 +140%	40−45 −140%
Forza Horizon 5	55−60 +136%	24−27 −136%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	64 −20.3%	75−80 +20.3%
Valorant	90−95 +137%	35−40 −137%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	37 +185%	12−14 −185%
Grand Theft Auto V	37 +185%	12−14 −185%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 +270%	45−50 −270%
Red Dead Redemption 2	21 +163%	8−9 −163%
World of Tanks	150−160 +111%	70−75 −111%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	45−50 +137%	18−20 −137%
Counter-Strike 2	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	18−20 +125%	8−9 −125%
Far Cry 5	60−65 +200%	21−24 −200%
Forza Horizon 4	55−60 +168%	21−24 −168%
Forza Horizon 5	35−40 +140%	14−16 −140%
Metro Exodus	50 +163%	18−20 −163%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	30−35 +146%	12−14 −146%
Valorant	55−60 +136%	24−27 −136%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	18−20 +375%	4−5 −375%
Dota 2	36 +80%	20−22 −80%
Grand Theft Auto V	36 +80%	20−22 −80%
Metro Exodus	15 +200%	5−6 −200%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	70 +141%	27−30 −141%
Red Dead Redemption 2	14−16 +133%	6−7 −133%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	36 +80%	20−22 −80%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	21−24 +156%	9−10 −156%
Counter-Strike 2	18−20 +375%	4−5 −375%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 +133%	3−4 −133%
Dota 2	88 +340%	20−22 −340%
Far Cry 5	27−30 +142%	12−14 −142%
Fortnite	28 +180%	10−11 −180%
Forza Horizon 4	30−35 +162%	12−14 −162%
Forza Horizon 5	18−20 +157%	7−8 −157%
Valorant	27−30 +180%	10−11 −180%

This is how RX 480 and R9 M390 compete in popular games:

RX 480 is 75% faster in 1080p
RX 480 is 148% faster in 1440p
RX 480 is 67% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

in Counter-Strike 2, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the RX 480 is 375% faster.
in Metro Exodus, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the R9 M390 is 69% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

RX 480 is ahead in 60 tests (94%)
R9 M390 is ahead in 3 tests (5%)
there's a draw in 1 test (2%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	22.36	9.91
Recency	29 June 2016	9 June 2015
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	2 GB
Chip lithography	14 nm	28 nm

RX 480 has a 125.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 480 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R9 M390 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon RX 480 is a desktop card while Radeon R9 M390 is a notebook one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.