AMD Radeon 780M vs AMD Radeon R9 M380 Comparison

The Verdict

The benchmark database presents a clear generational split between these two AMD mobile graphics solutions. The AMD Radeon 780M, a 2024 integrated graphics processor built on the Phoenix chip, holds a decisive advantage in the one directly comparable compute benchmark. The AMD Radeon R9 M380, a 2015 discrete mobile part based on the Strato chip with GCN 2.0 architecture, trails significantly.

For users prioritizing raw compute throughput in OpenCL workloads, the data points firmly toward the 780M. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 18,602 outperforms the R9 M380’s 12,565 by 48%. This is not a marginal lead; it represents a substantial performance gulf. The 780M also posts a higher average benchmark score of 17,588 across all recorded tests, compared to 15,521 for the R9 M380. Its percentile ranking among all GPUs sits at 61, versus 58 for the older part.

However, the R9 M380 is not without merit in specific contexts. The database shows it achieving a Geekbench Metal score of 18,476, a result that indicates strong performance in Apple’s Metal API environment. The 780M has no recorded Metal benchmark result, so users whose workloads are Metal-centric may find the older discrete card surprisingly competitive, at least within that specific ecosystem.

The verdict from the recorded data: the 780M is the superior choice for general compute and OpenCL-bound tasks, offering a 48% performance lead in that specific test. The R9 M380 remains viable only for niche Metal API scenarios where the 780M has no measured presence. The 780M’s active production status and 2024 release date also suggest a longer support horizon compared to the R9 M380, which is marked as end-of-life.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is vast, reflecting nearly a decade of semiconductor advancement. The 780M utilizes the Phoenix chip manufactured on TSMC’s 4 nm process node. The R9 M380 uses the Strato chip on a 28 nm process. This process shrink is a primary driver of the performance disparity.

Transistor counts tell a stark story. The 780M packs 25,390 million transistors on a 178 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 142.6 million per square millimeter. The R9 M380 contains only 2,080 million transistors on a 160 mm² die, with a density of 13.0 million per square millimeter. The 780M achieves over ten times the transistor density, enabling far more complex compute units within a similar physical footprint.

The 780M employs RDNA 3.0 architecture, a modern design with 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 32 render output units. It also includes 12 dedicated ray tracing cores, a feature entirely absent from the R9 M380. The older card, based on GCN 2.0, also has 768 shading units and 48 TMUs, but only 16 ROPs, half the count of the newer part.

Clock speeds differ notably. The 780M has a base clock of 800 MHz and a boost clock of 2,900 MHz. The R9 M380 operates at a 900 MHz base and 1,000 MHz boost. Despite the higher base clock on the older chip, the 780M’s boost clock is nearly three times higher, contributing significantly to its compute advantage.

Memory architecture is fundamentally different. The 780M uses system shared memory, with bandwidth described as system dependent. The R9 M380 has dedicated 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 96.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The 780M’s memory performance is variable and tied to the host system’s RAM, while the R9 M380 offers fixed, dedicated bandwidth.

API support also diverges. The 780M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The R9 M380 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The 780M’s newer DirectX and Vulkan versions unlock modern rendering features that the older card cannot access.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon 780M has an average benchmark score of 17,588, while the AMD Radeon R9 M380 has an average score of 15,521. This gives the 780M a roughly 13% advantage in overall averaged performance across all recorded tests.

Q: How do the two compare in the Geekbench OpenCL test?

A: The 780M scores 18,602 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the R9 M380 scores 12,565. The 780M wins this head-to-head test by 48%, representing the only directly comparable benchmark between the two in the database.

Q: Does the R9 M380 have any benchmark where it outperforms the 780M?

A: The R9 M380 has a recorded Geekbench Metal score of 18,476. The 780M has no recorded Metal benchmark result, so there is no direct head-to-head comparison in that API. In the single shared test, Geekbench OpenCL, the 780M wins decisively.

Q: What are the transistor density figures for each chip?

A: The 780M’s Phoenix chip has a transistor density of 142.6 million per square millimeter, based on 25,390 million transistors in a 178 mm² die. The R9 M380’s Strato chip has a density of 13.0 million per square millimeter, based on 2,080 million transistors in a 160 mm² die.

Q: Which GPU supports ray tracing hardware?

A: The AMD Radeon 780M includes 12 ray tracing cores. The AMD Radeon R9 M380 has no ray tracing cores listed in its specifications, indicating no dedicated hardware support for this feature.

Q: What is the production status of each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon 780M is listed as active in production. The AMD Radeon R9 M380 is listed as end-of-life, meaning it is no longer actively manufactured or supported.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every major specification category. The 780M uses a 4 nm process node, while the R9 M380 uses 28 nm. Transistor counts are 25,390 million versus 2,080 million, and die sizes are 178 mm² versus 160 mm².

Clock speeds: the 780M has an 800 MHz base and 2,900 MHz boost. The R9 M380 has a 900 MHz base and 1,000 MHz boost. Memory configurations are entirely different: the 780M uses system shared memory with no dedicated VRAM, while the R9 M380 has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 96.00 GB/s bandwidth.

Render output units differ: the 780M has 32 ROPs, the R9 M380 has 16. Ray tracing cores are present on the 780M (12 cores) and absent on the R9 M380. Pixel rate is 92.80 GPixel/s for the 780M versus 16.00 GPixel/s for the R9 M380. Texture rate is 139.2 GTexel/s versus 48.00 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 8.909 TFLOPS versus 1.536 TFLOPS.

The 780M has a TDP of 15 W and is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with no power connectors. The R9 M380 has no TDP listed. Bus interfaces differ: PCIe 4.0 x8 for the 780M, PCIe 3.0 x16 for the R9 M380. API support differs in DirectX (12 Ultimate versus 12_0) and Vulkan (1.4 versus 1.2.170). Release dates are 2024-01-30 for the 780M and 2015-05-04 for the R9 M380.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains only one head-to-head benchmark result between these two GPUs: Geekbench OpenCL. The 780M scores 18,602, while the R9 M380 scores 12,565. The 780M wins with a delta of 48%. This result is consistent with the broader compute specifications, where the 780M’s FP32 throughput of 8.909 TFLOPS dwarfs the R9 M380’s 1.536 TFLOPS. The 780M also achieves a texture rate of 139.2 GTexel/s and pixel rate of 92.80 GPixel/s, versus 48.00 GTexel/s and 16.00 GPixel/s respectively for the older card.

Beyond the direct head-to-head, the 780M’s nearest rivals in the database include the AMD Radeon Pro 560 (average score 17,551, delta 0.2%), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 (17,639, delta -0.3%), and the AMD Radeon HD 7790 (17,666, delta -0.4%). These scores cluster tightly around the 780M’s average of 17,588, indicating that the integrated 780M performs in the same league as these discrete desktop and mobile parts.

The R9 M380’s nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti (average score 15,548, delta -0.2%), the AMD Radeon Pro W5500 (15,679, delta -1%), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 (15,290, delta 1.5%). This places the R9 M380’s average score of 15,521 in a similar performance band to these older or lower-tier discrete GPUs, but well below the 780M’s tier.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon 780M wins decisively in compute-heavy workloads that leverage OpenCL. Its 48% lead in the Geekbench OpenCL test is the headline result. The architecture differences support this: RDNA 3.0 with 768 shading units at boost clocks up to 2,900 MHz, combined with 8.909 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, makes it the clear choice for general-purpose GPU compute, modern DirectX 12 Ultimate games, and Vulkan 1.4 applications. Its active production status and 2024 release date mean it benefits from ongoing driver support and software optimization.

The 780M also wins on efficiency metrics. Its 15 W TDP is remarkably low for the performance it delivers, making it suitable for thin-and-light laptops where power draw is critical. The R9 M380, as a discrete GPU with no listed TDP, likely consumes considerably more power, though the database does not provide a figure to confirm this.

The AMD Radeon R9 M380 wins in one specific scenario: Metal API workloads. Its Geekbench Metal score of 18,476 is the highest single benchmark result recorded for either GPU in any API. While the 780M has no Metal result, the R9 M380’s strong showing suggests it may be preferable in macOS environments or applications that rely heavily on Metal. The R9 M380 also offers dedicated 4 GB of GDDR5 memory with 96.00 GB/s bandwidth, which could provide more consistent memory performance in scenarios where system shared memory on the 780M might be a bottleneck.

For users with legacy software that requires older DirectX 12 (12_0) or Vulkan 1.2.170 support, the R9 M380 remains functional, though the 780M’s backward compatibility through newer API versions likely covers most use cases. The R9 M380’s end-of-life status, however, means no new optimizations or bug fixes are forthcoming.

In summary, the 780M is the superior all-around performer for modern workloads, with a 48% compute advantage and architectural features like ray tracing that the R9 M380 cannot match. The R9 M380 retains a niche edge only in Metal-specific applications, where its 18,476 score stands as the best recorded result between the two.