Radeon Pro W6800 vs R9 M385

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 M385 with Radeon Pro W6800, including specs and performance data.

R9 M385
2015
4 GB GDDR5
5.34

Pro W6800 outperforms R9 M385 by a whopping 860% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking60752
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data23.19
Power efficiencyno data14.81
ArchitectureGCN 2.0 (2013−2017)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code nameStratoNavi 21
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date5 May 2015 (9 years ago)8 June 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$2,249

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 cores8963840
Core clock speed900 MHz2075 MHz
Boost clock speed1100 MHz2320 MHz
Number of transistors2,080 million26,800 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data250 Watt
Texture fill rate56.00556.8
Floating-point processing power1.792 TFLOPS17.82 TFLOPS
ROPs1696
TMUs56240
Ray Tracing Coresno data60

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 sizemedium sizedno data
Bus supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Lengthno data267 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin

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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount4 GB32 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1500 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth76.8 GB/s512.0 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 outputs6x mini-DisplayPort
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 compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.36.5
OpenGL4.44.6
OpenCLNot Listed2.1
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 M385 5.34
Pro W6800 51.28
+860%

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 M385 2060
Pro W6800 19791
+861%

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 HD16−18
−863%
154
+863%
1440p14−16
−864%
135
+864%
4K8−9
−963%
85
+963%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
−956%
95−100
+956%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16
−671%
100−110
+671%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 6−7
−1400%
90−95
+1400%
Battlefield 5 14−16
−1071%
160−170
+1071%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−12
−809%
100−105
+809%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
−956%
95−100
+956%
Far Cry 5 12−14
−758%
100−110
+758%
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16
−733%
120−130
+733%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
−532%
210−220
+532%
Hitman 3 10−12
−891%
100−110
+891%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
−491%
200−210
+491%
Metro Exodus 12−14
−1031%
140−150
+1031%
Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
−671%
100−110
+671%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 18−20
−953%
200−210
+953%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
−198%
140−150
+198%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16
−671%
100−110
+671%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 6−7
−1400%
90−95
+1400%
Battlefield 5 14−16
−1071%
160−170
+1071%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−12
−809%
100−105
+809%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
−956%
95−100
+956%
Far Cry 5 12−14
−758%
100−110
+758%
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16
−733%
120−130
+733%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
−532%
210−220
+532%
Hitman 3 10−12
−891%
100−110
+891%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
−491%
200−210
+491%
Metro Exodus 12−14
−1031%
140−150
+1031%
Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
−671%
100−110
+671%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 18−20
−1358%
277
+1358%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
−489%
100−110
+489%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
−198%
140−150
+198%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16
−671%
100−110
+671%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 6−7
−1400%
90−95
+1400%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−12
−809%
100−105
+809%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
−956%
95−100
+956%
Far Cry 5 12−14
−758%
100−110
+758%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
−532%
210−220
+532%
Hitman 3 10−12
−891%
100−110
+891%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
−562%
225
+562%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 18−20
−1311%
268
+1311%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
−772%
157
+772%
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50
−198%
140−150
+198%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
−671%
100−110
+671%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 10−11
−960%
100−110
+960%
Far Cry New Dawn 8−9
−900%
80−85
+900%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
−1060%
55−60
+1060%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 60−65
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
−1120%
60−65
+1120%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−2250%
45−50
+2250%
Far Cry 5 6−7
−900%
60−65
+900%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
−1908%
260−270
+1908%
Hitman 3 9−10
−689%
70−75
+689%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
−1392%
179
+1392%
Metro Exodus 3−4
−1733%
55
+1733%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
−1975%
80−85
+1975%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−547%
220−230
+547%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 10−11
−790%
85−90
+790%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5
−1275%
55−60
+1275%
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5
−1075%
45−50
+1075%
Hitman 3 1−2
−4200%
40−45
+4200%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−11
−2000%
210−220
+2000%
Metro Exodus 2−3
−3500%
70−75
+3500%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
−9800%
99
+9800%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
−1167%
35−40
+1167%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3
−1700%
35−40
+1700%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−1650%
35−40
+1650%
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 21−24
Far Cry 5 3−4
−1000%
30−35
+1000%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
−1420%
75−80
+1420%
Watch Dogs: Legion 2−3
−1350%
27−30
+1350%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
−717%
45−50
+717%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Shadow of the Tomb Raider 212
+0%
212
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Shadow of the Tomb Raider 126
+0%
126
+0%

This is how R9 M385 and Pro W6800 compete in popular games:

  • Pro W6800 is 863% faster in 1080p
  • Pro W6800 is 864% faster in 1440p
  • Pro W6800 is 963% faster in 4K

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

  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the Pro W6800 is 9800% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Pro W6800 is ahead in 68 tests (97%)
  • there's a draw in 2 tests (3%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 5.34 51.28
Recency 5 May 2015 8 June 2021
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 32 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 7 nm

Pro W6800 has a 860.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 300% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon Pro W6800 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R9 M385 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R9 M385 is a notebook card while Radeon Pro W6800 is a 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 M385
Radeon R9 M385
AMD Radeon Pro W6800
Radeon Pro W6800

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.


5 1 vote

Rate Radeon R9 M385 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 80 votes

Rate Radeon Pro W6800 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.