GeForce GT 750M SLI vs Radeon R9 M380

Place in the ranking	551	566
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Architecture	GCN 2.0 (2013−2017)	Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code name	Strato	N14P-GT
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	5 May 2015 (9 years ago)	1 April 2013 (11 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 cores	768	768
Core clock speed	900 MHz	967 MHz
Boost clock speed	1000 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	2,080 million	1300 Million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	28 nm
Texture fill rate	48.00	no data
Floating-point processing power	1.536 TFLOPS	no data
ROPs	16	no data
TMUs	48	no 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 size	medium sized	large
Bus support	PCIe 3.0	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	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 type	GDDR5	DDR3, GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	2x 2 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	2x 128 Bit
Memory clock speed	1500 MHz	2000 - 5000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	96 GB/s	no 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 Connectors	No outputs	no 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	+	-
TrueAudio	+	-
ZeroCore	+	-
Switchable graphics	+	-

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX	DirectX® 12	11
Shader Model	6.3	no data
OpenGL	4.4	no data
OpenCL	Not Listed	no data
Mantle	+	-
CUDA	-	+

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 HD

50−55

−6%

53
+6%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 +7.1%	14−16 −7.1%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	21−24 +4.5%	21−24 −4.5%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 +7.1%	14−16 −7.1%
Forza Horizon 4	27−30 +3.7%	27−30 −3.7%
Forza Horizon 5	16−18 +6.3%	16−18 −6.3%
Metro Exodus	18−20 +5.6%	18−20 −5.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2	20−22 +0%	20−22 +0%
Valorant	24−27 +4.2%	24−27 −4.2%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	21−24 +4.5%	21−24 −4.5%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 +7.1%	14−16 −7.1%
Dota 2	24−27 +4.2%	24−27 −4.2%
Far Cry 5	30−35 +3.2%	30−35 −3.2%
Fortnite	40−45 +4.9%	40−45 −4.9%
Forza Horizon 4	27−30 +3.7%	27−30 −3.7%
Forza Horizon 5	16−18 +6.3%	16−18 −6.3%
Grand Theft Auto V	24−27 +4.2%	24−27 −4.2%
Metro Exodus	18−20 +5.6%	18−20 −5.6%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	55−60 +3.6%	55−60 −3.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2	20−22 +0%	20−22 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	21−24 +4.8%	21−24 −4.8%
Valorant	24−27 +4.2%	24−27 −4.2%
World of Tanks	110−120 −46.8%	163 +46.8%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	21−24 +4.5%	21−24 −4.5%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 +7.1%	14−16 −7.1%
Dota 2	24−27 +4.2%	24−27 −4.2%
Far Cry 5	30−35 +3.2%	30−35 −3.2%
Forza Horizon 4	27−30 +3.7%	27−30 −3.7%
Forza Horizon 5	16−18 +6.3%	16−18 −6.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	55−60 +3.6%	55−60 −3.6%
Valorant	24−27 +4.2%	24−27 −4.2%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	9−10 +12.5%	8−9 −12.5%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	35−40 +2.6%	35−40 −2.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
World of Tanks	50−55 +4%	50−55 −4%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	12−14 +8.3%	12−14 −8.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Far Cry 5	14−16 +7.1%	14−16 −7.1%
Forza Horizon 4	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Metro Exodus	10−12 +10%	10−11 −10%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Valorant	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Dota 2	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Metro Exodus	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	21−24 +5%	20−22 −5%
Red Dead Redemption 2	5−6 +25%	4−5 −25%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Dota 2	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Far Cry 5	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Fortnite	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	5−6 +25%	4−5 −25%
Valorant	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%

This is how R9 M380 and GT 750M SLI compete in popular games:

GT 750M SLI is 6% faster in 1080p

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

in Metro Exodus, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the R9 M380 is 100% faster.
in World of Tanks, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the GT 750M SLI is 47% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

R9 M380 is ahead in 37 tests (59%)
GT 750M SLI is ahead in 1 test (2%)
there's a draw in 25 tests (40%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	6.92	6.67
Recency	5 May 2015	1 April 2013

R9 M380 has a 3.7% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 2 years.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Radeon R9 M380 and GeForce GT 750M SLI.

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.

Radeon R9 M380

GeForce GT 750M SLI

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Radeon R9 M380

UHD Graphics 64EUs (Alder Lake 12th Gen)

GeForce GT 750M SLI

Radeon RX 550 Mobile

Radeon R9 M380

GeForce GTX 770M

Radeon RX 5600M

GeForce GTX 970M SLI

UHD Graphics 770

HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge)

Radeon RX 5600M

GeForce GTX 980M SLI

GeForce RTX 2050 Mobile

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.

3.6 11 votes

Rate Radeon R9 M380 on a scale of 1 to 5:

4 16 votes

Rate GeForce GT 750M SLI on a scale of 1 to 5:

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R9 M380 or GeForce GT 750M SLI, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.