Radeon R9 380 vs R9 295X2

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 295X2 and Radeon R9 380, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

R9 295X2
2014
8 GB GDDR5, 500 Watt
22.31
+40.3%

R9 295X2 outperforms R9 380 by a considerable 40% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking248339
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation2.419.21
Power efficiency3.115.84
ArchitectureGCN 2.0 (2013−2017)GCN 3.0 (2014−2019)
GPU code nameVesuviusAntigua
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Designreferencereference
Release date29 April 2014 (10 years ago)18 June 2015 (9 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,499 $199

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

R9 380 has 282% better value for money than R9 295X2.

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 cores28161792
Compute unitsno data28
Boost clock speed1018 MHz970 MHz
Number of transistors6,200 million5,000 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)500 Watt190 Watt
Texture fill rate179.2108.6
Floating-point processing power5.733 TFLOPS3.476 TFLOPS
ROPs6432
TMUs176112

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).

Bus supportPCIe 2.1 x16PCIe 3.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length307 mm221 mm
Width2-slot2-slot
Form factorno datafull height / full length / dual slot
Supplementary power connectors2 x 8-pin2 x 6-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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
High bandwidth memory (HBM)no data-
Maximum RAM amount8 GB4 GB
Memory bus width512 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1250 MHz970 MHz
Memory bandwidth640 GB/s182.4 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 Connectors1x DVI, 4x mini-DisplayPort2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
Eyefinity++
Number of Eyefinity displaysno data6
HDMI++
DisplayPort support-+

Supported technologies

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

CrossFire++
FRTC-+
FreeSync++
HD3D++
LiquidVR++
PowerTune-+
TressFX+-
TrueAudio-+
ZeroCore-+
UVD+-
VCE-+
DDMA audio++

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 12DirectX® 12
Shader Model6.36.3
OpenGL4.64.5
OpenCL2.02.0
Vulkan++
Mantle-+

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.

R9 295X2 22.31
+40.3%
R9 380 15.90

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.

R9 295X2 8608
+40.3%
R9 380 6134

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.

R9 295X2 21197
+158%
R9 380 8218

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 HD95−100
+39.7%
68
−39.7%
4K35−40
+40%
25
−40%

Cost per frame, $

1080p15.782.93
4K42.837.96

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Battlefield 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Hitman 3 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Metro Exodus 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Battlefield 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Hitman 3 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Metro Exodus 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 100
+0%
100
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Hitman 3 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30
+0%
30
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Hitman 3 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Metro Exodus 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Hitman 3 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Metro Exodus 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 19
+0%
19
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

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

This is how R9 295X2 and R9 380 compete in popular games:

  • R9 295X2 is 40% faster in 1080p
  • R9 295X2 is 40% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 72 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 22.31 15.90
Recency 29 April 2014 18 June 2015
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 4 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 500 Watt 190 Watt

R9 295X2 has a 40.3% higher aggregate performance score, and a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

R9 380, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, and 163.2% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R9 295X2 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R9 380 in performance tests.


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 R9 295X2
Radeon R9 295X2
AMD Radeon R9 380
Radeon R9 380

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.


3.7 94 votes

Rate Radeon R9 295X2 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 799 votes

Rate Radeon R9 380 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.