Radeon R9 M390 vs GeForce GTX 1080

Place in the ranking	103	458
Place by popularity	63	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	19.33	no data
Power efficiency	15.48	no data
Architecture	Pascal (2016−2021)	GCN (2012−2015)
GPU code name	GP104	Pitcairn
Market segment	Desktop	Laptop
Release date	27 May 2016 (8 years ago)	9 June 2015 (9 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$599	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	2560	1024
Core clock speed	1607 MHz	no data
Boost clock speed	1733 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	7,200 million	5000 Million
Manufacturing process technology	16 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	180 Watt	no data
Maximum GPU temperature	94 °C	no data
Texture fill rate	277.3	no data
Floating-point processing power	8.873 TFLOPS	no data
ROPs	64	no data
TMUs	160	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	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	no data
Length	267 mm	no data
Height	4.376" (11.1 cm)	no data
Width	2-slot	no data
Recommended system power (PSU)	500 Watt	no data
Supplementary power connectors	1x 8-pin	no data
SLI options	+	-

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
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	2 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	10 GB/s	no data
Memory bandwidth	320 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	DP 1.42, HDMI 2.0b, DL-DVI	no data
Multi monitor support	+	no data
Eyefinity	-	+
HDMI	+	-
G-SYNC support	+	-

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync	-	+
HD3D	-	+
PowerTune	-	+
DualGraphics	-	+
ZeroCore	-	+
Switchable graphics	-	+
GPU Boost	3.0	no data
VR Ready	+	no data
Ansel	+	-

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	no data
OpenGL	4.5	4.4
OpenCL	1.2	Not Listed
Vulkan	1.2.131	-
Mantle	-	+
CUDA	+	-

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 40.47
+308%

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.

GTX 1080 29263
+329%

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	126 +186%	44 −186%
1440p	75 +317%	18−20 −317%
4K	60 +186%	21 −186%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	4.75	no data
1440p	7.99	no data
4K	9.98	no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	85−90 +372%	18−20 −372%
Cyberpunk 2077	85−90 +358%	18−20 −358%
Elden Ring	140−150 +411%	27−30 −411%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	84 +163%	30−35 −163%
Counter-Strike 2	85−90 +372%	18−20 −372%
Cyberpunk 2077	85−90 +358%	18−20 −358%
Forza Horizon 4	190−200 +408%	35−40 −408%
Metro Exodus	111 +311%	27−30 −311%
Red Dead Redemption 2	114 +338%	24−27 −338%
Valorant	160−170 +338%	35−40 −338%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	130 +306%	30−35 −306%
Counter-Strike 2	85−90 +372%	18−20 −372%
Cyberpunk 2077	85−90 +358%	18−20 −358%
Dota 2	113 +414%	22 −414%
Elden Ring	140−150 +411%	27−30 −411%
Far Cry 5	75 +82.9%	40−45 −82.9%
Fortnite	158 +172%	55−60 −172%
Forza Horizon 4	190−200 +408%	35−40 −408%
Grand Theft Auto V	119 +250%	34 −250%
Metro Exodus	83 +207%	27−30 −207%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	242 +214%	75−80 −214%
Red Dead Redemption 2	53 +104%	24−27 −104%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	142 +330%	33 −330%
Valorant	160−170 +338%	35−40 −338%
World of Tanks	272 +90.2%	140−150 −90.2%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	73 +128%	30−35 −128%
Counter-Strike 2	47 +161%	18−20 −161%
Cyberpunk 2077	85−90 +358%	18−20 −358%
Dota 2	100 +186%	35−40 −186%
Far Cry 5	179 +337%	40−45 −337%
Forza Horizon 4	190−200 +408%	35−40 −408%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	88 +14.3%	75−80 −14.3%
Valorant	160−170 +338%	35−40 −338%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	72 +500%	12−14 −500%
Elden Ring	80−85 +493%	14−16 −493%
Grand Theft Auto V	72 +454%	12−14 −454%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 +272%	45−50 −272%
Red Dead Redemption 2	35 +338%	8−9 −338%
World of Tanks	250−260 +261%	70−75 −261%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	72 +279%	18−20 −279%
Counter-Strike 2	28 +180%	10−11 −180%
Cyberpunk 2077	40−45 +500%	7−8 −500%
Far Cry 5	118 +462%	21−24 −462%
Forza Horizon 4	110−120 +436%	21−24 −436%
Metro Exodus	82 +332%	18−20 −332%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	70−75 +492%	12−14 −492%
Valorant	120−130 +416%	24−27 −416%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	40−45 +950%	4−5 −950%
Dota 2	74 +270%	20−22 −270%
Elden Ring	40−45 +567%	6−7 −567%
Grand Theft Auto V	74 +270%	20−22 −270%
Metro Exodus	28 +460%	5−6 −460%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	106 +266%	27−30 −266%
Red Dead Redemption 2	21 +250%	6−7 −250%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	74 +270%	20−22 −270%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	42 +367%	9−10 −367%
Counter-Strike 2	40−45 +950%	4−5 −950%
Cyberpunk 2077	18−20 +500%	3−4 −500%
Dota 2	129 +545%	20−22 −545%
Far Cry 5	59 +392%	12−14 −392%
Fortnite	54 +440%	10−11 −440%
Forza Horizon 4	65−70 +458%	12−14 −458%
Valorant	65−70 +580%	10−11 −580%

This is how GTX 1080 and R9 M390 compete in popular games:

GTX 1080 is 186% faster in 1080p
GTX 1080 is 317% faster in 1440p
GTX 1080 is 186% 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 GTX 1080 is 950% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Without exception, GTX 1080 surpassed R9 M390 in all 63 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	40.47	9.91
Recency	27 May 2016	9 June 2015
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	2 GB
Chip lithography	16 nm	28 nm

GTX 1080 has a 308.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 months, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 75% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce GTX 1080 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R9 M390 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 1080 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.