Radeon Pro 560 vs R9 M395

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 M395 with Radeon Pro 560, including specs and performance data.

R9 M395
2015
4 GB GDDR5
12.73
+41.3%

R9 M395 outperforms Pro 560 by a considerable 41% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking390481
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data8.38
ArchitectureGCN (2012−2015)GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)
GPU code nameno dataPolaris 21
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date9 June 2015 (9 years ago)18 April 2017 (7 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 cores17921024
Core clock speed834 MHz907 MHz
Number of transistors5000 Million3,000 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data75 Watt
Texture fill rateno data58.05
Floating-point processing powerno data1.858 TFLOPS
ROPsno data16
TMUsno data64

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 sizelargelarge
Bus supportPCIe 3.0no data
Interfaceno dataPCIe 3.0 x8
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 GB4 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1250 MHz1270 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data81.28 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 dataNo outputs
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 (12_0)
Shader Modelno data6.4
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 M395 12.73
+41.3%
Pro 560 9.01

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 M395 4911
+41.3%
Pro 560 3475

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

R9 M395 8656
+63.2%
Pro 560 5305

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

R9 M395 6819
+75.2%
Pro 560 3892

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

R9 M395 38490
+66.6%
Pro 560 23105

Gaming performance

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

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 20−22
+42.9%
14−16
−42.9%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30−33
+36.4%
21−24
−36.4%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 20−22
+53.8%
12−14
−53.8%
Battlefield 5 40−45
+46.4%
27−30
−46.4%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 24−27
+44.4%
18−20
−44.4%
Cyberpunk 2077 20−22
+42.9%
14−16
−42.9%
Far Cry 5 30−33
+42.9%
21−24
−42.9%
Far Cry New Dawn 35−40
+40%
24−27
−40%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
+40%
60−65
−40%
Hitman 3 24−27
+41.2%
16−18
−41.2%
Horizon Zero Dawn 65−70
+34%
50−55
−34%
Metro Exodus 40−45
+53.6%
27−30
−53.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
+40%
24−27
−40%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 40−45
+40%
30−33
−40%
Watch Dogs: Legion 70−75
+20%
60−65
−20%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30−33
+36.4%
21−24
−36.4%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 20−22
+53.8%
12−14
−53.8%
Battlefield 5 40−45
+46.4%
27−30
−46.4%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 24−27
+44.4%
18−20
−44.4%
Cyberpunk 2077 20−22
+42.9%
14−16
−42.9%
Far Cry 5 30−33
+42.9%
21−24
−42.9%
Far Cry New Dawn 35−40
+40%
24−27
−40%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
+40%
60−65
−40%
Hitman 3 24−27
+41.2%
16−18
−41.2%
Horizon Zero Dawn 65−70
+34%
50−55
−34%
Metro Exodus 40−45
+53.6%
27−30
−53.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
+40%
24−27
−40%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 40−45
+40%
30−33
−40%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+28%
24−27
−28%
Watch Dogs: Legion 70−75
+20%
60−65
−20%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30−33
+36.4%
21−24
−36.4%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 20−22
+53.8%
12−14
−53.8%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 24−27
+44.4%
18−20
−44.4%
Cyberpunk 2077 20−22
+42.9%
14−16
−42.9%
Far Cry 5 30−33
+42.9%
21−24
−42.9%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
+40%
60−65
−40%
Hitman 3 24−27
+41.2%
16−18
−41.2%
Horizon Zero Dawn 65−70
+34%
50−55
−34%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 40−45
+40%
30−33
−40%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+28%
24−27
−28%
Watch Dogs: Legion 70−75
+20%
60−65
−20%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
+40%
24−27
−40%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27
+47.1%
16−18
−47.1%
Far Cry New Dawn 20−22
+42.9%
14−16
−42.9%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
+44.4%
9−10
−44.4%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 9−10
+80%
5−6
−80%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
+44.4%
9−10
−44.4%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+50%
10−11
−50%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+68.4%
35−40
−68.4%
Hitman 3 16−18
+33.3%
12−14
−33.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 24−27
+36.8%
18−20
−36.8%
Metro Exodus 21−24
+75%
12−14
−75%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 21−24
+110%
10−11
−110%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+62.5%
8−9
−62.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion 80−85
+40.4%
55−60
−40.4%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
+40%
14−16
−40%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14
+50%
8−9
−50%
Far Cry New Dawn 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%
Hitman 3 9−10
+80%
5−6
−80%
Horizon Zero Dawn 60−65
+69.4%
35−40
−69.4%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+71.4%
7−8
−71.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+83.3%
6−7
−83.3%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+54.5%
10−12
−54.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−12
+120%
5−6
−120%
Watch Dogs: Legion 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+33.3%
9−10
−33.3%

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

  • in Shadow of the Tomb Raider, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the R9 M395 is 120% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, R9 M395 surpassed Pro 560 in all 72 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 12.73 9.01
Recency 9 June 2015 18 April 2017
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm

R9 M395 has a 41.3% higher aggregate performance score.

Pro 560, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon R9 M395 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon Pro 560 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R9 M395 is a notebook graphics card while Radeon Pro 560 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 M395
Radeon R9 M395
AMD Radeon Pro 560
Radeon Pro 560

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.


3.3 21 vote

Rate Radeon R9 M395 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 112 votes

Rate Radeon Pro 560 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.