Radeon PRO W7900 vs R8 M365DX

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R8 M365DX with Radeon PRO W7900, including specs and performance data.

R8 M365DX
2015
1.55

PRO W7900 outperforms R8 M365DX by a whopping 4190% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking100926
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data7.38
Power efficiencyno data17.36
ArchitectureGCN 3.0 (2014−2019)RDNA 3.0 (2022−2026)
GPU code nameMesoNavi 31
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date3 June 2015 (10 years ago)13 April 2023 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$3,999

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

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 cores3846144
Core clock speed900 MHz1855 MHz
Boost clock speed1125 MHz2495 MHz
Number of transistors1,550 million57,700 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data295 Watt
Texture fill rate27.00958.1
Floating-point processing power0.864 TFLOPS61.32 TFLOPS
ROPs8192
TMUs24384
Ray Tracing Coresno data96
L0 Cacheno data3 MB
L1 Cache96 KB3 MB
L2 Cache256 KB6 MB
L3 Cacheno data96 MB

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 sizemedium sizedno data
InterfaceIGPPCIe 4.0 x16
Lengthno data280 mm
Widthno data3-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data2x 8-pin

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 typeSystem SharedGDDR6
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared48 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared384 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared2250 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data864.0 GB/s
Shared memory+-
Resizable BAR-+

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display ConnectorsNo outputs3x DisplayPort 2.1, 1x mini-DisplayPort 2.1

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (12_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.06.7
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.02.2
Vulkan1.2.1311.3

Synthetic benchmarks

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.

R8 M365DX 1.55
PRO W7900 66.49
+4190%

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.

R8 M365DX 647
Samples: 6
PRO W7900 27729
+4186%
Samples: 81

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
−4186%
600−650
+4186%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data6.67

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−3900%
120−130
+3900%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 1−2
−3900%
40−45
+3900%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 3−4
−3900%
120−130
+3900%
Counter-Strike 2 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−3900%
120−130
+3900%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−3900%
120−130
+3900%
Fortnite 6−7
−4067%
250−260
+4067%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
−3789%
350−400
+3789%
Forza Horizon 5 2−3
−4150%
85−90
+4150%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
−3900%
400−450
+3900%
Valorant 35−40
−4067%
1500−1550
+4067%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 3−4
−3900%
120−130
+3900%
Counter-Strike 2 0−1 0−1
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 44
−4105%
1850−1900
+4105%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−3900%
120−130
+3900%
Dota 2 18−20
−4111%
800−850
+4111%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−3900%
120−130
+3900%
Fortnite 6−7
−4067%
250−260
+4067%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
−3789%
350−400
+3789%
Forza Horizon 5 2−3
−4150%
85−90
+4150%
Grand Theft Auto V 1−2
−3900%
40−45
+3900%
Metro Exodus 2−3
−4150%
85−90
+4150%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
−3900%
400−450
+3900%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7
−4186%
300−310
+4186%
Valorant 35−40
−4067%
1500−1550
+4067%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 3−4
−3900%
120−130
+3900%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−3900%
120−130
+3900%
Dota 2 18−20
−4111%
800−850
+4111%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−3900%
120−130
+3900%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
−3789%
350−400
+3789%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
−3900%
400−450
+3900%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
−4186%
300−310
+4186%
Valorant 35−40
−4067%
1500−1550
+4067%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 6−7
−4067%
250−260
+4067%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 5−6
−4100%
210−220
+4100%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 10−12
−3991%
450−500
+3991%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
−3963%
650−700
+3963%
Valorant 8−9
−3650%
300−310
+3650%

1440p
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−3900%
40−45
+3900%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−4150%
85−90
+4150%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
−4150%
170−180
+4150%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4
−3900%
120−130
+3900%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 3−4
−3900%
120−130
+3900%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−4186%
600−650
+4186%
Valorant 8−9
−3650%
300−310
+3650%

4K
Ultra

Dota 2 2−3
−4150%
85−90
+4150%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
−4150%
85−90
+4150%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 3−4
−3900%
120−130
+3900%

This is how R8 M365DX and PRO W7900 compete in popular games:

  • PRO W7900 is 4186% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.55 66.49
Recency 3 June 2015 13 April 2023
Chip lithography 28 nm 5 nm

PRO W7900 has a 4190% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, and a 460% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon PRO W7900 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R8 M365DX in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R8 M365DX is a notebook graphics card while Radeon PRO W7900 is a workstation one.

Other comparisons

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.


2 9 votes

Rate Radeon R8 M365DX on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 87 votes

Rate Radeon PRO W7900 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R8 M365DX or Radeon PRO W7900, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.