ATI Radeon 9800 PRO vs R9 380

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 380 and Radeon 9800 PRO, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

R9 380
2015
4 GB GDDR5, 190 Watt
15.86
+10473%

R9 380 outperforms ATI 9800 PRO by a whopping 10473% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking3531430
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation9.19no data
Power efficiency5.720.22
ArchitectureGCN 3.0 (2014−2019)Rage 8 (2002−2007)
GPU code nameAntiguaR350
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Designreferenceno data
Release date18 June 2015 (9 years ago)1 March 2003 (21 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$199 $399

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

R9 380 and ATI 9800 PRO have a nearly equal value for money.

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 cores1792no data
Compute units28no data
Core clock speedno data380 MHz
Boost clock speed970 MHzno data
Number of transistors5,000 million117 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm150 nm
Power consumption (TDP)190 Watt47 Watt
Texture fill rate108.63.040
Floating-point processing power3.476 TFLOPSno data
ROPs328
TMUs1128

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 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16AGP 8x
Length221 mmno data
Width2-slot1-slot
Form factorfull height / full length / dual slotno data
Supplementary power connectors2 x 6-pin1x Molex
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 typeGDDR5DDR
High bandwidth memory (HBM)-no data
Maximum RAM amount4 GB128 MB
Memory bus width256 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed970 MHz340 MHz
Memory bandwidth182.4 GB/s21.76 GB/s
Shared memory-no data

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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video
Eyefinity+-
Number of Eyefinity displays6no data
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+-
TrueAudio+-
ZeroCore+-
VCE+-
DDMA audio+no data

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 129.0 (9_0)
Shader Model6.3no data
OpenGL4.52.0
OpenCL2.0N/A
Vulkan+N/A
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.

R9 380 15.86
+10473%
ATI 9800 PRO 0.15

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 380 6097
+10234%
ATI 9800 PRO 59

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 HD650−1
4K25-0−1

Cost per frame, $

1080p3.06no data
4K7.96no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 35−40 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 27−30 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35 0−1

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 35−40 0−1
Battlefield 5 60−65 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 27−30 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35 0−1
Far Cry 5 50−55 0−1
Fortnite 80−85 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 60−65 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 40−45 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 50−55 0−1
Valorant 120−130
+12100%
1−2
−12100%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 35−40 0−1
Battlefield 5 60−65 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 27−30 0−1
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 190−200
+19700%
1−2
−19700%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35 0−1
Dota 2 90−95 0−1
Far Cry 5 50−55 0−1
Fortnite 80−85 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 60−65 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 40−45 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 55−60 0−1
Metro Exodus 30−35 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 50−55 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 51 0−1
Valorant 120−130
+12100%
1−2
−12100%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 60−65 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 27−30 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35 0−1
Dota 2 90−95 0−1
Far Cry 5 50−55 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 60−65 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 40−45 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 50−55 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30 0−1
Valorant 120−130
+12100%
1−2
−12100%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 80−85 0−1

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 16−18 0−1
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 110−120
+10900%
1−2
−10900%
Grand Theft Auto V 24−27 0−1
Metro Exodus 18−20 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 140−150
+14300%
1−2
−14300%
Valorant 150−160
+15100%
1−2
−15100%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 40−45 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14 0−1
Far Cry 5 30−35 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 35−40 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 27−30 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24 0−1

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 30−35 0−1

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 12−14 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 7−8 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 27−30 0−1
Metro Exodus 10−12 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 19 0−1
Valorant 80−85 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 7−8 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7 0−1
Dota 2 50−55 0−1
Far Cry 5 16−18 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 24−27 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 12−14 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 14−16 0−1

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 15.86 0.15
Recency 18 June 2015 1 March 2003
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 128 MB
Chip lithography 28 nm 150 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 190 Watt 47 Watt

R9 380 has a 10473.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 12 years, a 3100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 435.7% more advanced lithography process.

ATI 9800 PRO, on the other hand, has 304.3% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R9 380 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon 9800 PRO in performance tests.

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 380
Radeon R9 380
ATI Radeon 9800 PRO
Radeon 9800 PRO

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.


4.1 833 votes

Rate Radeon R9 380 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 59 votes

Rate Radeon 9800 PRO on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R9 380 or Radeon 9800 PRO, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.