Radeon R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) vs Apple M1 8-Core GPU
Aggregate performance score
We've compared M1 8-Core GPU with Radeon R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop), including specs and performance data.
Apple M1 8-Core GPU outperforms R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) by a whopping 397% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 385 | 808 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Architecture | no data | GCN (2012−2015) |
| GPU code name | no data | Kaveri Spectre |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 10 November 2020 (4 years ago) | 14 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 cores | 8 | 384 |
| Core clock speed | 1278 MHz | 720 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 5 nm | 28 nm |
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.
| Shared memory | + | + |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | no data | 12 (FL 12_0) |
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.
3DMark Ice Storm GPU
Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.
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 | 27
+80%
| 15
−80%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 21−24
+188%
|
8−9
−188%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 27−30
+286%
|
7−8
−286%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 45−50
+543%
|
7−8
−543%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 21−24
+188%
|
8−9
−188%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 27−30
+286%
|
7−8
−286%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 55−60
+358%
|
12−14
−358%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 35−40
+1700%
|
2−3
−1700%
|
| Metro Exodus | 35−40
+660%
|
5−6
−660%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 30−35
+240%
|
10−11
−240%
|
| Valorant | 55−60
+1733%
|
3−4
−1733%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 45−50
+543%
|
7−8
−543%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 21−24
+188%
|
8−9
−188%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 27−30
+286%
|
7−8
−286%
|
| Dota 2 | 45−50
+717%
|
6
−717%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 50−55
+219%
|
16−18
−219%
|
| Fortnite | 75−80
+413%
|
14−16
−413%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 55−60
+358%
|
12−14
−358%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 35−40
+1700%
|
2−3
−1700%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 45−50
+444%
|
9
−444%
|
| Metro Exodus | 35−40
+660%
|
5−6
−660%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 100−105
+285%
|
24−27
−285%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 30−35
+240%
|
10−11
−240%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 40−45
+282%
|
10−12
−282%
|
| Valorant | 55−60
+1733%
|
3−4
−1733%
|
| World of Tanks | 180−190
+264%
|
50−55
−264%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 45−50
+543%
|
7−8
−543%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 21−24
+188%
|
8−9
−188%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 27−30
+286%
|
7−8
−286%
|
| Dota 2 | 45−50
+600%
|
7−8
−600%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 50−55
+219%
|
16−18
−219%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 55−60
+358%
|
12−14
−358%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 35−40
+1700%
|
2−3
−1700%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 100−105
+285%
|
24−27
−285%
|
| Valorant | 55−60
+1733%
|
3−4
−1733%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Dota 2 | 20−22
+1900%
|
1−2
−1900%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 20−22
+1900%
|
1−2
−1900%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 110−120
+526%
|
18−20
−526%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 12−14
+500%
|
2−3
−500%
|
| World of Tanks | 95−100
+405%
|
18−20
−405%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 27−30
+1250%
|
2−3
−1250%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 16−18
+467%
|
3−4
−467%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−11
+150%
|
4−5
−150%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 30−35
+357%
|
7−8
−357%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 30−35
+3200%
|
1−2
−3200%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 21−24
+600%
|
3−4
−600%
|
| Metro Exodus | 27−30
+480%
|
5−6
−480%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 18−20
+200%
|
6−7
−200%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
+278%
|
9−10
−278%
|
4K
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 5−6
+400%
|
1−2
−400%
|
| Dota 2 | 24−27
+56.3%
|
16−18
−56.3%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 24−27
+60%
|
14−16
−60%
|
| Metro Exodus | 9−10
+800%
|
1−2
−800%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 40−45
+400%
|
8−9
−400%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 9−10
+800%
|
1−2
−800%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 24−27
+60%
|
14−16
−60%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 12−14
+550%
|
2−3
−550%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 5−6
+400%
|
1−2
−400%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+100%
|
2−3
−100%
|
| Dota 2 | 24−27
+56.3%
|
16−18
−56.3%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 16−18
+750%
|
2−3
−750%
|
| Fortnite | 14−16
+1400%
|
1−2
−1400%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 18−20 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 5 | 10−11
+900%
|
1−2
−900%
|
| Valorant | 14−16
+400%
|
3−4
−400%
|
This is how Apple M1 8-Core GPU and R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) compete in popular games:
- Apple M1 8-Core GPU is 80% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Forza Horizon 4, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Apple M1 8-Core GPU is 3200% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Without exception, Apple M1 8-Core GPU surpassed R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) in all 58 of our tests.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 13.16 | 2.65 |
| Recency | 10 November 2020 | 14 January 2014 |
| Chip lithography | 5 nm | 28 nm |
Apple M1 8-Core GPU has a 396.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, and a 460% more advanced lithography process.
The M1 8-Core GPU is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) in performance tests.
Be aware that Apple M1 8-Core GPU is a notebook card while Radeon R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) 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.
