Radeon R5 (Stoney Ridge) vs R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop)

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) with Radeon R5 (Stoney Ridge), including specs and performance data.

R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop)
2014
2.74
+85.1%

R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) outperforms R5 (Stoney Ridge) by an impressive 85% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking793978
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data2.28
ArchitectureGCN (2012−2015)GCN 1.2/2.0 (2015−2016)
GPU code nameKaveri SpectreStoney Ridge
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date14 January 2014 (10 years ago)1 June 2016 (8 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 cores384192
Core clock speed720 MHzno data
Boost clock speedno data800 MHz
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data12-45 Watt

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

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 bus widthno data64 Bit
Shared memory++

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (FL 12_0)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. 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.

R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) 2.74
+85.1%
R5 (Stoney Ridge) 1.48

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.

R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) 1988
+57.2%
R5 (Stoney Ridge) 1264

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.

R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) 7338
+119%
R5 (Stoney Ridge) 3346

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.

R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) 1406
+82.1%
R5 (Stoney Ridge) 772

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.

R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) 9651
+103%
R5 (Stoney Ridge) 4755

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.

R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) 89954
+75.1%
R5 (Stoney Ridge) 51382

Unigine Heaven 3.0

This is an old DirectX 11 benchmark using Unigine, a 3D game engine by eponymous Russian company. It displays a fantasy medieval town sprawling over several flying islands. Version 3.0 was released in 2012, and in 2013 it was superseded by Heaven 4.0, which introduced several slight improvements, including a newer version of Unigine.

R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) 18
+29.9%
R5 (Stoney Ridge) 14

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 HD14
+75%
8
−75%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
+125%
4
−125%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2 0−1
Battlefield 5 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+66.7%
3
−66.7%
Far Cry New Dawn 7−8
+0%
7
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+367%
3−4
−367%
Hitman 3 8−9
+33.3%
6−7
−33.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+50%
14−16
−50%
Metro Exodus 2−3
−250%
7
+250%
Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
+0%
12
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+15.2%
30−35
−15.2%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2 0−1
Battlefield 5 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Far Cry New Dawn 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+367%
3−4
−367%
Hitman 3 8−9
+33.3%
6−7
−33.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+50%
14−16
−50%
Metro Exodus 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
+50%
8−9
−50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+27.3%
10−12
−27.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+15.2%
30−35
−15.2%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+367%
3−4
−367%
Hitman 3 8−9
+33.3%
6−7
−33.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+50%
14−16
−50%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
+50%
8−9
−50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+27.3%
10−12
−27.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+15.2%
30−35
−15.2%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Hitman 3 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Watch Dogs: Legion 16−18
+167%
6−7
−167%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 1−2 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 0−1 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%

This is how R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) and R5 (Stoney Ridge) compete in popular games:

  • R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) is 75% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Far Cry 5, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) is 400% faster.
  • in Metro Exodus, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the R5 (Stoney Ridge) is 250% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) is ahead in 44 tests (90%)
  • R5 (Stoney Ridge) is ahead in 1 test (2%)
  • there's a draw in 4 tests (8%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.74 1.48
Recency 14 January 2014 1 June 2016

R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) has a 85.1% higher aggregate performance score.

R5 (Stoney Ridge), on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years.

The Radeon R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R5 (Stoney Ridge) in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) is a desktop card while Radeon R5 (Stoney Ridge) 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 Radeon R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop)
Radeon R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop)
AMD Radeon R5 (Stoney Ridge)
Radeon R5 (Stoney Ridge)

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.


3.9 21 vote

Rate Radeon R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 50 votes

Rate Radeon R5 (Stoney Ridge) 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.