Radeon R9 M385 vs Cypress

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Cypress with Radeon R9 M385, including specs and performance data.

Cypress
8.18
+53.2%

Cypress outperforms R9 M385 by an impressive 53% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking505609
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
ArchitectureTeraScale 2 (2009−2015)GCN (2011−2017)
GPU code nameCypressStrato
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release dateno data16 June 2015 (9 years ago)

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores1600no data
Boost clock speedno data1100 MHz
Number of transistors2,154 million2,080 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm28 nm
Texture fill rateno data56.00
Floating-point performanceno data1.792 gflops

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 sizeno datamedium sized
Bus supportno dataPCIe 3.0
Interfaceno dataPCIe 3.0 x16

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 typeno dataGDDR5
Maximum RAM amountno data4 GB
Memory bus widthno data128 Bit
Memory clock speedno data1500 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data76.8 GB/s
Shared memoryno data-

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 dataNo outputs
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 compatibility

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

DirectX11.2 (11_0)DirectX® 12
Shader Model5.06.3
OpenGL4.44.4
OpenCL1.2Not Listed
VulkanN/A-
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

Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Battlefield 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Hitman 3 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Battlefield 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Hitman 3 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Hitman 3 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Hitman 3 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Hitman 3 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Metro Exodus 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 68 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 8.18 5.34
Chip lithography 40 nm 28 nm

Cypress has a 53.2% higher aggregate performance score.

R9 M385, on the other hand, has a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

The Cypress is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R9 M385 in performance tests.

Be aware that Cypress is a desktop card while Radeon R9 M385 is a notebook one.


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

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 Cypress
Cypress
AMD Radeon R9 M385
Radeon R9 M385

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


1.1 297 votes

Rate Cypress on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
5 1 vote

Rate Radeon R9 M385 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.