Winner
AMD Radeon R9 380X
GPUBoss recommends the AMD Radeon R9 380X based on its benchmarks and compute performance.
See full details| | Radeon R9 380X vs R7 260X |
by techPowerUp!This chip is technologically more up-to-date than the Hawaii-based R9 390 series since it features the company's latest Graphics CoreNext (GCN) 1.2 stream processors.
by techPowerUp!Alongside the Radeon R9 280X and R9 270X, AMD launched its entry-level Radeon R7 260X graphics card, fit for visually-intensive desktops with some mild gaming thrown into the mix.
Gaming | |
| | |
| Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Bioshock Infinite and 21 more | |
Graphics | |
| | |
| T-Rex, Manhattan, Cloud Gate Factor, Sky Diver Factor and 1 more | |
Computing | |
| | |
| Face Detection, Ocean Surface Simulation and 3 more | |
Performance per Watt | |
| | |
| Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Bioshock Infinite and 32 more | |
Value | |
| | |
| Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Bioshock Infinite and 32 more | |
Noise and Power | |
| | |
| TDP, Idle Power Consumption, Load Power Consumption and 2 more | |
| 7.4 | Overall Score |
| | |
Winner |
AMD Radeon R9 380XGPUBoss Winner | | |
| |||||||
| Better PassMark score | 6,048 | vs | 3,128 | Around 95% better PassMark score | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Significantly higher memory bandwidth | 182.4 GB/s | vs | 104 GB/s | More than 75% higher memory bandwidth | |||
| More memory | 4,096 MB | vs | 2,048 MB | 2x more memory | |||
| Better floating-point performance | 3,973 GFLOPS | vs | 1,971.2 GFLOPS | More than 2x better floating-point performance | |||
| Higher texture rate | 124.2 GTexel/s | vs | 61.6 GTexel/s | More than 2x higher texture rate | |||
| Significantly more shading units | 2,048 | vs | 896 | 1152 more shading units | |||
| Significantly more texture mapping units | 128 | vs | 56 | 72 more texture mapping units | |||
| Significantly higher metro: last light framerate | 64 | vs | 6.9 | More than 9.2x higher metro: last light framerate | |||
| Better fire strike factor score | 56.18 | vs | 33.7 | More than 65% better fire strike factor score | |||
| Higher pixel rate | 31.04 GPixel/s | vs | 17.6 GPixel/s | More than 75% higher pixel rate | |||
| More compute units | 32 | vs | 14 | 18 more compute units | |||
| More render output processors | 32 | vs | 16 | Twice as many render output processors | |||
| Better particle simulation score | 582.48 mInteraction/s | vs | 352.84 mInteraction/s | More than 65% better particle simulation score | |||
| Better PassMark direct compute score | 2,984 | vs | 1,681 | Around 80% better PassMark direct compute score | |||
| |||||||
| Higher clock speed | 1,100 MHz | vs | 970 MHz | Around 15% higher clock speed | |||
| Higher effective memory clock speed | 6,500 MHz | vs | 5,700 MHz | Around 15% higher effective memory clock speed | |||
| Higher memory clock speed | 1,625 MHz | vs | 1,425 MHz | Around 15% higher memory clock speed | |||
| Significantly lower TDP | 115W | vs | 190W | Around 40% lower TDP | |||
| Radeon R9 380X | vs | R7 260X | ||
| 9.1 | 7.8 | Radeon R9 380X | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| VS | |
| 269 € | ||
| 1050 Ti vs 1060 | ||
| VS | |
| 269 € | ||
| 1060 vs 970 | ||
| VS | |
| 1050 Ti vs 1050 | ||
| VS | |
| 1050 Ti vs 970 | ||
| VS | |
| 269 € | ||
| RX 580 vs 1060 | ||
| VS | |
| 1050 Ti vs 960 | ||
| VS | |
| MX150 vs 1050 | ||