Radeon R9 M390 vs R9 M295X Mac Edition

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 M295X Mac Edition and Radeon R9 M390, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

R9 M295X Mac Edition
2014
4 GB GDDR5, 250 Watt
11.55
+38.7%

R9 M295X Mac Edition outperforms R9 M390 by a substantial 39% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking398475
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency3.66no data
ArchitectureGCN 3.0 (2014−2019)GCN (2012−2015)
GPU code nameAmethystPitcairn
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date23 November 2014 (10 years ago)9 June 2015 (9 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 cores20481024
Core clock speed850 MHzno data
Number of transistors5,000 million5000 Million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Wattno data
Texture fill rate108.8no data
Floating-point processing power3.482 TFLOPSno data
ROPs32no data
TMUs128no data

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 datalarge
Bus supportno dataPCIe 3.0
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)no data

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
Maximum RAM amount4 GB2 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1362 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth174.3 GB/sno data
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 ConnectorsNo outputsno data
Eyefinity-+

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync-+
HD3D-+
PowerTune-+
DualGraphics-+
ZeroCore-+
Switchable graphics-+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_0)DirectX® 12
Shader Model6.3no data
OpenGL4.64.4
OpenCL2.0Not Listed
Vulkan1.2.131-
Mantle-+

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 HD55−60
+27.9%
43
−27.9%
4K27−30
+35%
20
−35%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Battlefield 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Far Cry 5 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Fortnite 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Valorant 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Battlefield 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Dota 2 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Far Cry 5 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Fortnite 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 34
+0%
34
+0%
Metro Exodus 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 31
+0%
31
+0%
Valorant 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Dota 2 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Far Cry 5 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18
+0%
18
+0%
Valorant 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Metro Exodus 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Valorant 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Metro Exodus 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12
+0%
12
+0%
Valorant 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Dota 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

This is how R9 M295X Mac Edition and R9 M390 compete in popular games:

  • R9 M295X Mac Edition is 28% faster in 1080p
  • R9 M295X Mac Edition is 35% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 63 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 11.55 8.33
Recency 23 November 2014 9 June 2015
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 2 GB

R9 M295X Mac Edition has a 38.7% higher aggregate performance score, and a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

R9 M390, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 6 months.

The Radeon R9 M295X Mac Edition is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R9 M390 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 M295X Mac Edition
Radeon R9 M295X Mac Edition
AMD Radeon R9 M390
Radeon R9 M390

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.


2.8 6 votes

Rate Radeon R9 M295X Mac Edition on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 14 votes

Rate Radeon R9 M390 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R9 M295X Mac Edition or Radeon R9 M390, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.