Radeon R9 390X vs GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q

Place in the ranking	210	230
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	9.98
Power efficiency	12.18	6.13
Architecture	Pascal (2016−2021)	GCN 2.0 (2013−2017)
GPU code name	GP104	Grenada
Market segment	Laptop	Desktop
Design	no data	reference
Release date	27 June 2017 (7 years ago)	18 June 2015 (9 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$429

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	2560	2816
Core clock speed	1290 MHz	no data
Boost clock speed	1468 MHz	1050 MHz
Number of transistors	7,200 million	6,200 million
Manufacturing process technology	16 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	150 Watt	275 Watt
Texture fill rate	234.9	184.8
Floating-point processing power	7.516 TFLOPS	5.914 TFLOPS
ROPs	64	64
TMUs	160	176

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
Bus support	no data	PCIe 3.0
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x16
Length	no data	275 mm
Width	no data	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	1 x 6-pin, 1 x 8-pin
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	GDDR5X	GDDR5
High bandwidth memory (HBM)	no data	-
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	0 MB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	512 Bit
Memory clock speed	1251 MHz	1050 MHz
Memory bandwidth	320.3 GB/s	384 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 Connectors	No outputs	2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
Eyefinity	-	+
Number of Eyefinity displays	no data	6
HDMI	-	+
DisplayPort support	-	+
G-SYNC support	+	-

Supported technologies

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

CrossFire	-	+
FreeSync	-	+
PowerTune	-	+
TrueAudio	-	+
VCE	-	+
DDMA audio	no data	+
VR Ready	+	no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	DirectX® 12
Shader Model	6.4	6.3
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	2.0
Vulkan	1.2.131	+
Mantle	-	+
CUDA	6.1	-

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.

GTX 1080 Max-Q 26.55
+8.5%

R9 390X 24.47

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.

GTX 1080 Max-Q 10207
+8.5%

R9 390X 9408

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.

GTX 1080 Max-Q 23540
+31.2%

R9 390X 17944

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

GTX 1080 Max-Q 39562
+10.5%

R9 390X 35807

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

GTX 1080 Max-Q 18192
+46.8%

R9 390X 12389

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

GTX 1080 Max-Q 114542
+54.1%

R9 390X 74351

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.

GTX 1080 Max-Q 387951
+22%

R9 390X 318024

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	100 +11.1%	90 −11.1%
1440p	65 +18.2%	55−60 −18.2%
4K	49 −4.1%	51 +4.1%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	no data	4.77
1440p	no data	7.80
4K	no data	8.41

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	50−55 +11.1%	45−50 −11.1%
Cyberpunk 2077	50−55 +8%	50−55 −8%
Elden Ring	85−90 +10%	80−85 −10%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	74 −1.4%	75−80 +1.4%
Counter-Strike 2	50−55 +11.1%	45−50 −11.1%
Cyberpunk 2077	28 −78.6%	50−55 +78.6%
Forza Horizon 4	171 +59.8%	100−110 −59.8%
Metro Exodus	84 +31.3%	60−65 −31.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2	55−60 +5.6%	50−55 −5.6%
Valorant	100−110 +8.2%	95−100 −8.2%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	106 +41.3%	75−80 −41.3%
Counter-Strike 2	50−55 +11.1%	45−50 −11.1%
Cyberpunk 2077	23 −117%	50−55 +117%
Dota 2	98 +16.7%	80−85 −16.7%
Elden Ring	85−90 +10%	80−85 −10%
Far Cry 5	68 −11.8%	75−80 +11.8%
Fortnite	134 +8.9%	120−130 −8.9%
Forza Horizon 4	132 +23.4%	100−110 −23.4%
Grand Theft Auto V	94 +11.9%	80−85 −11.9%
Metro Exodus	65 +1.6%	60−65 −1.6%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	116 −33.6%	150−160 +33.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2	16 −238%	50−55 +238%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	85−90 +11.5%	78 −11.5%
Valorant	100 +2%	95−100 −2%
World of Tanks	260−270 +3.1%	250−260 −3.1%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	68 −10.3%	75−80 +10.3%
Counter-Strike 2	50−55 +11.1%	45−50 −11.1%
Cyberpunk 2077	19 −163%	50−55 +163%
Dota 2	102 +21.4%	80−85 −21.4%
Far Cry 5	75−80 +3.9%	75−80 −3.9%
Forza Horizon 4	112 +4.7%	100−110 −4.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	87 −78.2%	150−160 +78.2%
Valorant	128 +30.6%	95−100 −30.6%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	61 +48.8%	40−45 −48.8%
Elden Ring	45−50 +11.6%	40−45 −11.6%
Grand Theft Auto V	61 +48.8%	40−45 −48.8%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 +0%	170−180 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	24−27 +13.6%	21−24 −13.6%
World of Tanks	170−180 +7.4%	160−170 −7.4%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	63 +28.6%	45−50 −28.6%
Counter-Strike 2	21−24 +9.5%	21−24 −9.5%
Cyberpunk 2077	12 −75%	21−24 +75%
Far Cry 5	75−80 +11.3%	70−75 −11.3%
Forza Horizon 4	81 +24.6%	65−70 −24.6%
Metro Exodus	67 +19.6%	55−60 −19.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	40−45 +11.1%	35−40 −11.1%
Valorant	97 +47%	65−70 −47%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	24−27 +9.1%	21−24 −9.1%
Dota 2	64 +52.4%	40−45 −52.4%
Elden Ring	21−24 +15.8%	18−20 −15.8%
Grand Theft Auto V	64 +52.4%	40−45 −52.4%
Metro Exodus	23 +21.1%	18−20 −21.1%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	103 +37.3%	75−80 −37.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2	16−18 +13.3%	14−16 −13.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	64 +52.4%	40−45 −52.4%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	35 +40%	24−27 −40%
Counter-Strike 2	24−27 +9.1%	21−24 −9.1%
Cyberpunk 2077	9−10 +12.5%	8−9 −12.5%
Dota 2	45−50 +11.9%	40−45 −11.9%
Far Cry 5	35−40 +12.5%	30−35 −12.5%
Fortnite	42 +40%	30−33 −40%
Forza Horizon 4	46 +24.3%	35−40 −24.3%
Valorant	52 +62.5%	30−35 −62.5%

This is how GTX 1080 Max-Q and R9 390X compete in popular games:

GTX 1080 Max-Q is 11% faster in 1080p
GTX 1080 Max-Q is 18% faster in 1440p
R9 390X is 4% faster in 4K

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

in Valorant, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GTX 1080 Max-Q is 63% faster.
in Red Dead Redemption 2, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the R9 390X is 238% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

GTX 1080 Max-Q is ahead in 52 tests (83%)
R9 390X is ahead in 10 tests (16%)
there's a draw in 1 test (2%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	26.55	24.47
Recency	27 June 2017	18 June 2015
Chip lithography	16 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	150 Watt	275 Watt

GTX 1080 Max-Q has a 8.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 75% more advanced lithography process, and 83.3% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q and Radeon R9 390X.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 1080 Max-Q is a notebook card while Radeon R9 390X is a desktop one.

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