AMD Radeon Pro 450 vs AMD Radeon R7 M380 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded benchmark data splits cleanly between these two AMD mobile graphics parts, and the win count is decisive: the Radeon R7 M380 takes 1 head-to-head win, while the Radeon Pro 450 takes 0. That single recorded comparison is in Geekbench OpenCL, where the R7 M380 scores 9313 against the Pro 450's 9002, a 3.3% advantage. For any workload that leans on OpenCL compute, the data points to the older R7 M380 as the faster option.

However, the broader benchmark picture favors the Pro 450 in overall capability. The Pro 450 has three recorded benchmark scores across Metal, OpenCL, and Vulkan, giving it an average benchmark score of 10804. The R7 M380 has only one recorded score, OpenCL, and its average sits at 9313. The Pro 450's average is roughly 16% higher than the R7 M380's single result, and its percentile ranking among all GPUs is 49 versus 46 for the R7 M380. So while the R7 M380 wins the one directly comparable OpenCL test, the Pro 450 demonstrates a wider range of API support and a higher overall standing in the database.

The use-case split is therefore about API coverage versus raw OpenCL speed. The Pro 450 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3, which means it can participate in modern cross-platform workloads across Metal, OpenCL, and Vulkan. The R7 M380 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170, a slightly older feature set. For users prioritizing OpenCL compute throughput specifically, the R7 M380 is the winner. For users who need Vulkan 1.3 support or a more complete modern API profile, the Pro 450 is the only choice between the two.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is substantial, and it explains much of the performance divergence. The Radeon Pro 450 uses the Baffin chip built on GCN 4.0 architecture, fabricated on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The Radeon R7 M380 uses the Tropo chip built on GCN 1.0 architecture, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. That is a full three architecture generations apart, with the Pro 450 representing the newer design.

The transistor counts reflect the process difference. The Pro 450 packs 3,000 million transistors into a 123 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 24.4 million per square millimeter. The R7 M380 fits 1,500 million transistors into the same 123 mm² die, yielding a density of 12.2 million per square millimeter. Both dies are identical in area, but the Pro 450 crams exactly twice the transistor count into the same footprint, a direct consequence of the 14 nm node versus 28 nm.

Core counts are identical on paper: both have 640 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 16 render output units. Clock speeds differ. The R7 M380 has a recorded base clock of 900 MHz and boost clock of 915 MHz. The Pro 450 has no recorded base or boost clock in the database, but its memory clock is listed at 1270 MHz with 5.1 Gbps effective, while the R7 M380's memory clock is 1000 MHz with 2 Gbps effective. The R7 M380 compensates with higher core clocks, which explains its pixel rate of 14.64 GPixel/s and texture rate of 36.60 GTexel/s, both above the Pro 450's 12.80 GPixel/s and 32.00 GTexel/s.

Memory architecture diverges sharply. The Pro 450 uses 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128 bit bus, delivering 81.28 GB/s of bandwidth. The R7 M380 uses 4 GB of DDR3 on the same 128 bit bus, but delivers only 32.00 GB/s. The Pro 450's bandwidth advantage is 2.5 times greater, which matters for memory-bound workloads despite the smaller capacity.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only directly comparable benchmark in the database is Geekbench OpenCL, and the result is close but clear. The R7 M380 scores 9313, the Pro 450 scores 9002, and the delta is 3.3% in favor of the R7 M380. That margin is modest, within the range of run-to-run variation, but it is the only recorded head-to-head data point, so it carries the full weight of the comparison.

Contextualizing against each card's nearest rivals puts the scores in perspective. The Pro 450's average of 10804 places it within 0.7% of the NVIDIA GeForce MX350 (10883), 0.4% above the NVIDIA Quadro K2200 (10761), 1.1% above the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti (10690), and 1.7% above the AMD Radeon RX 6600S (10629). These are all extremely tight margins, indicating the Pro 450 sits in a dense performance cluster where small differences separate tiers.

The R7 M380's average of 9313 places it 0.1% above the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M (9302), 0.2% above the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 465 (9294), 0.4% above the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 (9273), and 1% above the AMD Radeon Vega 8 (9221). The same pattern holds: the R7 M380 is surrounded by rivals within a 1% band, making its single OpenCL win over the Pro 450 the only meaningful separation between the two cards.

Specification Differences

The recorded specification differences between the two cards are extensive and worth enumerating directly.

Process node: The Pro 450 is on 14 nm, the R7 M380 on 28 nm.

Foundry: The Pro 450 uses GlobalFoundries, the R7 M380 uses TSMC.

Transistors: The Pro 450 has 3,000 million, the R7 M380 has 1,500 million.

Transistor density: The Pro 450 achieves 24.4M per mm², the R7 M380 achieves 12.2M per mm². Both share the same 123 mm² die size.

Memory type: The Pro 450 uses GDDR5, the R7 M380 uses DDR3.

Memory size: The Pro 450 has 2 GB, the R7 M380 has 4 GB.

Memory clock: The Pro 450 runs at 1270 MHz (5.1 Gbps effective), the R7 M380 at 1000 MHz (2 Gbps effective).

Memory bandwidth: The Pro 450 delivers 81.28 GB/s, the R7 M380 delivers 32.00 GB/s.

Base clock: The Pro 450 has no recorded base clock, the R7 M380 has 900 MHz.

Boost clock: The Pro 450 has no recorded boost clock, the R7 M380 has 915 MHz.

Pixel rate: The Pro 450 achieves 12.80 GPixel/s, the R7 M380 achieves 14.64 GPixel/s.

Texture rate: The Pro 450 achieves 32.00 GTexel/s, the R7 M380 achieves 36.60 GTexel/s.

FP32 performance: The Pro 450 delivers 1,024.0 GFLOPS, the R7 M380 delivers 1,171.2 GFLOPS.

FP16 performance: The Pro 450 delivers 1,024.0 GFLOPS (1:1), the R7 M380 has no recorded FP16 capability.

TDP: The Pro 450 is rated at 35 W, the R7 M380 has no recorded TDP.

Bus interface: The Pro 450 uses PCIe 3.0 x8, the R7 M380 uses PCIe 3.0 x16.

Slot width: The Pro 450 is an MXM Module, the R7 M380 has no recorded slot width.

DirectX support: The Pro 450 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), the R7 M380 supports DirectX 12 (11_1).

Vulkan support: The Pro 450 supports Vulkan 1.3, the R7 M380 supports Vulkan 1.2.170.

Release date: The Pro 450 launched on 2016-10-29, the R7 M380 on 2015-05-04.

Predecessor/successor: The R7 M380 lists a predecessor of "Solar System" and a successor of "Polaris Mobile". The Pro 450 lists neither.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins in OpenCL performance?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 M380 wins the only head-to-head OpenCL benchmark, scoring 9313 against the AMD Radeon Pro 450's 9002, a 3.3% advantage.

Q: Does the Radeon Pro 450 have higher memory bandwidth?

A: Yes. The Pro 450 delivers 81.28 GB/s from GDDR5 memory on a 128 bit bus, while the R7 M380 delivers 32.00 GB/s from DDR3 on the same 128 bit bus.

Q: Which GPU supports newer APIs?

A: The Radeon Pro 450 supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3, while the R7 M380 supports DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170. Both support OpenGL 4.6.

Q: How do these GPUs compare to their nearest rivals?

A: The Pro 450's average score of 10804 places it within 1.7% of four rivals, including the NVIDIA GeForce MX350 and Quadro K2200. The R7 M380's average of 9313 places it within 1% of four rivals, including the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M and GTX 960.

Q: Which GPU has more memory capacity?

A: The Radeon R7 M380 has 4 GB of DDR3, while the Radeon Pro 450 has 2 GB of GDDR5. The Pro 450 compensates with much higher bandwidth.

Q: Are these GPUs still in production?

A: No. Both are recorded as end-of-life products. The R7 M380 released on 2015-05-04, and the Pro 450 released on 2016-10-29.

The Verdict

The data supports a split verdict based on workload priorities. For OpenCL compute, the Radeon R7 M380 is the better choice. Its 9313 OpenCL score beats the Pro 450's 9002 by 3.3%, and its higher core clocks (900 MHz base, 915 MHz boost) drive superior pixel rate (14.64 GPixel/s) and texture rate (36.60 GTexel/s). It also offers 4 GB of memory versus 2 GB, which matters for capacity-sensitive workloads, and its PCIe 3.0 x16 interface provides double the lane width of the Pro 450's PCIe 3.0 x8.

For modern API coverage and memory bandwidth, the Radeon Pro 450 is the better pick. It supports Vulkan 1.3 and DirectX 12 (12_0), versions newer than the R7 M380's Vulkan 1.2.170 and DirectX 12 (11_1). Its GDDR5 memory delivers 81.28 GB/s, more than double the R7 M380's 32.00 GB/s, which is critical for high-resolution textures and memory-heavy scenes. Its 14 nm process also enables a 35 W TDP, while the R7 M380 has no recorded power limit, and the Pro 450's FP16 support at 1,024.0 GFLOPS (1:1) adds compute flexibility the R7 M380 lacks entirely.

The overall average benchmark score favors the Pro 450 at 10804 versus 9313, a roughly 16% gap, and its 49th percentile ranking versus 46th confirms a slightly higher standing in the database. The R7 M380's single win in OpenCL is real but narrow, and it comes from a card with a less modern architecture (GCN 1.0 on 28 nm) and no recorded Vulkan or Metal benchmarks to broaden its case.

Choose the Radeon Pro 450 if you need modern API support, high memory bandwidth, FP16 compute, and a lower power envelope. Choose the Radeon R7 M380 if your priority is raw OpenCL throughput, higher core clocks, or double the memory capacity. Both are end-of-life parts, and the data shows the Pro 450 as the more well-rounded option despite losing the single direct benchmark.