Radeon Pro 5300M vs R9 M295X

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 M295X with Radeon Pro 5300M, including specs and performance data.

R9 M295X
2014
0 MB Not Listed, 250 Watt
13.37

Pro 5300M outperforms R9 M295X by a moderate 15% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking384345
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency3.6712.44
ArchitectureGCN 3.0 (2014−2019)RDNA 1.0 (2019−2020)
GPU code nameAmethystNavi 14
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date23 November 2014 (10 years ago)13 November 2019 (5 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 cores20481280
Core clock speed723 MHz1000 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1250 MHz
Number of transistors5,000 million6,400 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Watt85 Watt
Texture fill rate92.54100.0
Floating-point processing power2.961 TFLOPS3.2 TFLOPS
ROPs3232
TMUs12880

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 sizelargemedium sized
Bus supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)PCIe 4.0 x8
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeNot ListedGDDR6
Maximum RAM amount0 MB4 GB
Memory bus widthNot Listed128 Bit
Memory clock speedno data1500 MHz
Memory bandwidth160.0 GB/s192.0 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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

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 compatibility

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

DirectXNot Listed12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.36.5
OpenGL4.44.6
OpenCLNot Listed2.0
Vulkan-1.2.131
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 M295X 13.37
Pro 5300M 15.42
+15.3%

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 M295X 5150
Pro 5300M 5940
+15.3%

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 HD49
−12.2%
55−60
+12.2%
4K26
−3.8%
27−30
+3.8%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
−14.3%
24−27
+14.3%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30−35
−12.9%
35−40
+12.9%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 21−24
−19%
24−27
+19%
Battlefield 5 40−45
−16.3%
50−55
+16.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 27−30
−14.8%
30−35
+14.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
−14.3%
24−27
+14.3%
Far Cry 5 30−35
−16.1%
35−40
+16.1%
Far Cry New Dawn 35−40
−13.5%
40−45
+13.5%
Forza Horizon 4 85−90
−13.6%
100−105
+13.6%
Hitman 3 24−27
−16%
27−30
+16%
Horizon Zero Dawn 65−70
−13%
75−80
+13%
Metro Exodus 45−50
−17.8%
50−55
+17.8%
Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
−13.5%
40−45
+13.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 40−45
−16.3%
50−55
+16.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 70−75
−8.2%
75−80
+8.2%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30−35
−12.9%
35−40
+12.9%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 21−24
−19%
24−27
+19%
Battlefield 5 40−45
−16.3%
50−55
+16.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 27−30
−14.8%
30−35
+14.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
−14.3%
24−27
+14.3%
Far Cry 5 30−35
−16.1%
35−40
+16.1%
Far Cry New Dawn 35−40
−13.5%
40−45
+13.5%
Forza Horizon 4 85−90
−13.6%
100−105
+13.6%
Hitman 3 24−27
−16%
27−30
+16%
Horizon Zero Dawn 65−70
−13%
75−80
+13%
Metro Exodus 45−50
−17.8%
50−55
+17.8%
Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
−13.5%
40−45
+13.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 40−45
−16.3%
50−55
+16.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 68
+83.8%
35−40
−83.8%
Watch Dogs: Legion 70−75
−8.2%
75−80
+8.2%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30−35
−12.9%
35−40
+12.9%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 21−24
−19%
24−27
+19%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 27−30
−14.8%
30−35
+14.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
−14.3%
24−27
+14.3%
Far Cry 5 30−35
−16.1%
35−40
+16.1%
Forza Horizon 4 85−90
−13.6%
100−105
+13.6%
Hitman 3 24−27
−16%
27−30
+16%
Horizon Zero Dawn 65−70
−13%
75−80
+13%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 40−45
−16.3%
50−55
+16.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 17
−118%
35−40
+118%
Watch Dogs: Legion 70−75
−8.2%
75−80
+8.2%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
−13.5%
40−45
+13.5%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27
−15.4%
30−33
+15.4%
Far Cry New Dawn 20−22
−20%
24−27
+20%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
−15.4%
14−16
+15.4%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−11
−30%
12−14
+30%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 14−16
−21.4%
16−18
+21.4%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
Far Cry 5 14−16
−20%
18−20
+20%
Forza Horizon 4 65−70
−20.9%
80−85
+20.9%
Hitman 3 16−18
−12.5%
18−20
+12.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn 27−30
−14.8%
30−35
+14.8%
Metro Exodus 21−24
−22.7%
27−30
+22.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 21−24
−27.3%
27−30
+27.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
−14.3%
16−18
+14.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 80−85
−14.5%
95−100
+14.5%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
−13.6%
24−27
+13.6%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14
−15.4%
14−16
+15.4%
Far Cry New Dawn 10−11
−10%
10−12
+10%
Hitman 3 9−10
−22.2%
10−12
+22.2%
Horizon Zero Dawn 65−70
−20%
75−80
+20%
Metro Exodus 12−14
−25%
14−16
+25%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14
−7.1%
14−16
+7.1%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 8−9
−12.5%
9−10
+12.5%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Far Cry 5 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
−16.7%
21−24
+16.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
−25%
14−16
+25%
Watch Dogs: Legion 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
−16.7%
14−16
+16.7%

This is how R9 M295X and Pro 5300M compete in popular games:

  • Pro 5300M is 12% faster in 1080p
  • Pro 5300M is 4% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the R9 M295X is 84% faster.
  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Pro 5300M is 118% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • R9 M295X is ahead in 1 test (1%)
  • Pro 5300M is ahead in 71 test (99%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 13.37 15.42
Recency 23 November 2014 13 November 2019
Chip lithography 28 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 250 Watt 85 Watt

Pro 5300M has a 15.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 300% more advanced lithography process, and 194.1% lower power consumption.

The Radeon Pro 5300M is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R9 M295X in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R9 M295X is a notebook graphics card while Radeon Pro 5300M is a mobile workstation one.


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 M295X
Radeon R9 M295X
AMD Radeon Pro 5300M
Radeon Pro 5300M

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.


4.6 17 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 169 votes

Rate Radeon Pro 5300M 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.