AMD Radeon 550X vs AMD Radeon R7 M380 Comparison

The AMD Radeon R7 M380 and the AMD Radeon 550X are both end-of-life mobile graphics solutions from AMD, but they represent two distinct architectural eras and performance philosophies. The R7 M380, based on the older GCN 1.0 architecture, leverages a wider configuration of older cores, while the 550X, built on the newer GCN 4.0 architecture, uses a more efficient design with faster memory. Benchmark data shows a narrow victory for the R7 M380 in the single available OpenCL test, but the 550X counters with superior API support and a more modern feature set.

Where Each One Wins

The performance split between these two GPUs is defined by raw compute throughput versus modern feature support. The AMD Radeon R7 M380 wins the only direct benchmark comparison available: the Geekbench OpenCL test, where it scores 9313 against the 550X’s 8866. This 5% advantage in the R7 M380’s favor suggests that its higher count of shading units (640 vs. 512) and texture mapping units (40 vs. 32) provides a tangible edge in general-purpose compute workloads that scale with parallel execution width. The data indicates this is a genuine, albeit modest, lead for the older part in this specific workload.

Conversely, the AMD Radeon 550X wins on architectural relevance and software longevity. While it loses the compute benchmark, it offers a more recent feature set. The 550X supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3, whereas the R7 M380 is limited to DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170. This means the 550X is better positioned for modern game titles and applications that leverage the latest graphics APIs. The 550X also has a distinct advantage in memory technology, using GDDR5 with a bandwidth of 112.0 GB/s, which is 3.5 times higher than the R7 M380’s DDR3 memory at 32.00 GB/s. This bandwidth advantage is crucial for texture-heavy scenes and higher resolutions, even if the 550X’s raw compute is slightly lower.

In practical terms, the R7 M380 is the winner for pure OpenCL compute tasks where shader count matters more than memory speed. The 550X is the better choice for gaming and modern application compatibility, given its superior API support and much faster memory subsystem. The 550X also benefits from a more efficient 14 nm process node compared to the R7 M380’s 28 nm, which is reflected in its specified 50 W TDP, though no TDP is listed for the R7 M380 for direct comparison.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are separated by two full generations of AMD’s Graphics Core Next (GCN) architecture. The R7 M380 is built on GCN 1.0, using the Tropo chip, and is part of the Gem System generation. In contrast, the 550X uses the Lexa chip based on GCN 4.0, placing it in the Polaris generation. This architectural leap is the primary driver of their different capabilities. The R7 M380 was manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC, while the 550X uses a more advanced 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. This process shrink allows the 550X to pack more transistors into a smaller space: it has 2,200 million transistors on a 103 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 21.4M / mm². The R7 M380, despite having fewer transistors (1,500 million), has a larger die (123 mm²) and a lower density of 12.2M / mm².

The core configurations differ significantly. The R7 M380 features 640 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 16 ROPs. The 550X has fewer shading units (512) and TMUs (32), but retains the same 16 ROPs. Despite having fewer cores, the 550X achieves higher clock speeds: its base clock is 1082 MHz and boost clock is 1218 MHz, compared to the R7 M380’s 900 MHz base and 915 MHz boost. This clock advantage, combined with the architectural efficiency of GCN 4.0, allows the 550X to nearly match the R7 M380’s FP32 performance, posting 1,247.2 GFLOPS versus 1,171.2 GFLOPS. The 550X also offers FP16 performance at a 1:1 ratio (1,247.2 GFLOPS), a feature not listed for the R7 M380.

Memory architecture is another major divider. The R7 M380 uses 4 GB of DDR3 on a 128-bit bus, resulting in a bandwidth of 32.00 GB/s. The 550X uses 2 GB of GDDR5 on the same 128-bit bus, but achieves 112.0 GB/s bandwidth. This is a critical difference for gaming, as the 550X can feed its shading units data much faster. The 550X also has a more modern bus interface (PCIe 3.0 x8) and a comprehensive set of display outputs including HDMI 2.0b and DisplayPort 1.4a, while the R7 M380’s display outputs are not specified.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The sole head-to-head benchmark available is Geekbench OpenCL, and it shows a decisive, if narrow, win for the AMD Radeon R7 M380. The R7 M380 scores 9313, while the Radeon 550X scores 8866, resulting in a deltaPct of 5% in favor of the older card. This result is notable because it shows that the extra shading units and TMUs on the R7 M380 can overcome the 550X’s higher clocks and superior memory bandwidth in this specific compute test. The R7 M380’s lead of 447 points is small in absolute terms, but it is a consistent indicator of its compute-oriented design.

Contextualizing this result with the nearest rivals reinforces the closeness of this matchup. The R7 M380’s score of 9313 places it just 0.1% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M (9302) and 0.2% ahead of the GTX 465 (9294). It is also 0.4% ahead of the GTX 960 (9273) and 1% ahead of the AMD Radeon Vega 8 (9221). This places the R7 M380 in a tight cluster of mid-range performers. The Radeon 550X, with its 8866 score, is 0.6% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 (8863) and 0.8% ahead of the Radeon R9 M265X (8851). However, it trails the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 (9022) by 1.2% and the NVIDIA TITAN V CEO Edition (9037) by 1.3%. This shows that while the R7 M380 edges out the 550X, both cards occupy a similar performance tier, trading blows with older and newer mid-range hardware.

The benchmark data also reveals a slight discrepancy in average scores. The R7 M380 has an average benchmark score of 9313, which matches its single OpenCL result. The 550X has an average score of 8918, which is an average of its OpenCL score (8866) and its Vulkan score (8970). This indicates that the 550X performs slightly better under Vulkan than OpenCL, a signal of its newer driver and architecture support. This is a point in the 550X’s favor for users running Vulkan-based applications, where the performance gap would likely be narrower or even reversed.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in OpenCL compute workloads?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 M380 is faster, scoring 9313 in Geekbench OpenCL compared to the Radeon 550X’s 8866, a 5% difference.

Q: Does the Radeon 550X support newer graphics APIs than the R7 M380?

A: Yes. The 550X supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3, while the R7 M380 is limited to DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170.

Q: How does memory bandwidth compare between the two cards?

A: The Radeon 550X has a significant advantage with 112.0 GB/s of GDDR5 bandwidth, compared to the R7 M380’s 32.00 GB/s from DDR3 memory.

Q: Which GPU has a higher transistor density?

A: The Radeon 550X has a higher transistor density at 21.4M / mm², due to its 14 nm process node, versus 12.2M / mm² for the R7 M380 on 28 nm.

Q: Are there any benchmark results for the R7 M380 other than OpenCL?

A: No, the data only includes a Geekbench OpenCL score for the R7 M380. The Radeon 550X has both OpenCL and Vulkan scores.

Q: What is the release date difference between the two GPUs?

A: The R7 M380 was released on May 4, 2015, while the Radeon 550X was released nearly four years later on March 26, 2019.

Specification Differences

The following table outlines the key specifications where the two GPUs differ, highlighting their distinct design philosophies.

| Specification | AMD Radeon R7 M380 | AMD Radeon 550X |

|:--- |:--- |:--- |

| Chip | Tropo | Lexa |

| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | GCN 4.0 |

| Generation | Gem System (R7 M300) | Polaris (RX 500X) |

| Process Node | 28 nm (TSMC) | 14 nm (GlobalFoundries) |

| Transistors | 1,500 million | 2,200 million |

| Die Size | 123 mm² | 103 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 12.2M / mm² | 21.4M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 900 MHz | 1082 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 915 MHz | 1218 MHz |

| Memory Size | 4 GB | 2 GB |

| Memory Type | DDR3 | GDDR5 |

| Memory Clock | 1000 MHz (2 Gbps effective) | 1750 MHz (7 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Bandwidth | 32.00 GB/s | 112.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 640 | 512 |

| Texture Mapping Units | 40 | 32 |

| Pixel Rate | 14.64 GPixel/s | 19.49 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 36.60 GTexel/s | 38.98 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 1,171.2 GFLOPS | 1,247.2 GFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | Not specified | 1,247.2 GFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | Not specified | 50 W |

| Slot Width | Not specified | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | Not specified | None |

| Suggested PSU | Not specified | 250 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |

| Display Outputs | Not specified | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0b, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a |

| DirectX Support | 12 (11_1) | 12 (12_0) |

| Vulkan Support | 1.2.170 | 1.3 |

| Release Date | May 4, 2015 | March 26, 2019 |

| Predecessor | Solar System | Polaris |

| Successor | Polaris Mobile | Vega |

| Geekbench OpenCL Score | 9313 | 8866 |

| Geekbench Vulkan Score | Not available | 8970 |