Iris Xe Graphics MAX vs Radeon R9 390

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 390 and Iris Xe Graphics MAX, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

R9 390
2015
0 MB GDDR5, 275 Watt
23.09
+352%

R9 390 outperforms Iris Xe Graphics MAX by a whopping 352% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking238618
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation11.63no data
Power efficiency5.8114.16
ArchitectureGCN 2.0 (2013−2017)Generation 12.1 (2020−2021)
GPU code nameGrenadaDG1
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Designreferenceno data
Release date18 June 2015 (9 years ago)31 October 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$329 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 cores2560768
Boost clock speed1000 MHz1650 MHz
Number of transistors6,200 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)275 Watt25 Watt
Texture fill rate160.079.20
Floating-point processing power5.12 TFLOPS2.534 TFLOPS
ROPs6424
TMUs16048

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 x16PCIe 4.0 x4
Length275 mmno data
Width2-slotIGP
Supplementary power connectors1 x 6-pin, 1 x 8-pinno data
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 typeGDDR5LPDDR4X
High bandwidth memory (HBM)-no data
Maximum RAM amount0 MB4 GB
Memory bus width512 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1000 MHz4.3 GB/s
Memory bandwidth384 GB/s68.26 GB/s

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 DisplayPortNo outputs
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+-
FreeSync+-
PowerTune+-
TrueAudio+-
VCE+-
DDMA audio+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212 (12_1)
Shader Model6.36.4
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.03.0
Vulkan+1.2
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 390 23.09
+352%
Iris Xe Graphics MAX 5.11

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 390 8909
+352%
Iris Xe Graphics MAX 1971

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 23.09 5.11
Recency 18 June 2015 31 October 2020
Chip lithography 28 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 275 Watt 25 Watt

R9 390 has a 351.9% higher aggregate performance score.

Iris Xe Graphics MAX, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 5 years, a 180% more advanced lithography process, and 1000% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R9 390 is our recommended choice as it beats the Iris Xe Graphics MAX 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 390
Radeon R9 390
Intel Iris Xe Graphics MAX
Iris Xe Graphics MAX

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.


4.2 563 votes

Rate Radeon R9 390 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 205 votes

Rate Iris Xe Graphics MAX 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.