AMD Radeon Pro 5300M vs AMD Radeon R7 M380 Comparison

# AMD Radeon Pro 5300M vs AMD Radeon R7 M380

The AMD Radeon Pro 5300M is decisively the faster GPU, leading the only shared benchmark by 214.1% and sitting at the 48th percentile of all GPUs compared to the R7 M380's 46th percentile. The Pro 5300M's average benchmark score of 10013 places it just 0.3% behind the NVIDIA Quadro K5100M and 0.5% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 870M, while the R7 M380's 9313 average puts it 0.1% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M and 1.0% ahead of the AMD Radeon Vega 8. In the sole head-to-head test available—Geekbench OpenCL—the Pro 5300M scores 29252 against the R7 M380's 9313, a massive 214.1% advantage that reflects a generational gap in architecture and memory technology.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct comparison available is Geekbench OpenCL, and the result is lopsided. The AMD Radeon Pro 5300M posts 29252 points versus the AMD Radeon R7 M380's 9313 points, a delta of 214.1%. This means the Pro 5300M more than triples the R7 M380's compute performance in this test. The margin is so large that it dwarfs the differences seen among each card's nearest rivals. For context, the Pro 5300M's closest competitor, the NVIDIA Quadro K5100M, averages 10043 points—just 0.3% higher than the Pro 5300M's 10013 average. The R7 M380's closest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M, averages 9302 points, a mere 0.1% behind. The 214.1% gap between the two AMD cards is orders of magnitude larger than these intra-tier differences.

Beyond the single shared test, the Pro 5300M's broader benchmark suite shows consistency across APIs. It scores 33626 in Geekbench Metal, 27912 in Geekbench Vulkan, and 29252 in Geekbench OpenCL, indicating robust performance across different compute interfaces. Its Passmark scores range from 25 in DirectX 12 to 80 in DirectX 9, with a G3D score of 5918 and a GPU compute score of 2658. The R7 M380 has no other benchmark results in the data, so its OpenCL score of 9313 stands as its only quantitative output. This lack of additional data points means the R7 M380's performance profile is defined entirely by that single result, which the Pro 5300M exceeds by a wide margin.

The Pro 5300M's average benchmark score of 10013 versus the R7 M380's 9313 represents a 7.5% overall advantage, though this understates the OpenCL-specific gap because the Pro 5300M's average includes its lower Passmark scores. In compute-heavy workloads, which the Geekbench OpenCL test measures, the Pro 5300M's superiority is overwhelming. The data shows no benchmark where the R7 M380 wins; it trails in the only test both cards took.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs represent completely different eras of AMD design. The Radeon Pro 5300M uses the Navi 14 chip built on RDNA 1.0 architecture, fabricated on a 7 nm TSMC process with 6,400 million transistors on a 158 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 40.5M per mm². The Radeon R7 M380 uses the Tropo chip based on GCN 1.0 architecture, fabricated on a 28 nm TSMC process with 1,500 million transistors on a 123 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 12.2M per mm². The Pro 5300M packs over four times more transistors into a die that is only 28% larger, a direct consequence of the 7 nm versus 28 nm process gap.

Compute resources differ sharply. The Pro 5300M has 1280 shading units, 80 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs, while the R7 M380 has 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 16 ROPs—exactly half in each category. This doubling of execution resources explains much of the performance delta. Clock speeds also favor the Pro 5300M, with a base of 1000 MHz and boost of 1250 MHz versus the R7 M380's 900 MHz base and 915 MHz boost. Combined with the higher core counts, the Pro 5300M achieves 3.200 TFLOPS FP32 and 6.400 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1), while the R7 M380 manages 1,171.2 GFLOPS FP32 and has no listed FP16 capability.

Memory architecture is another major differentiator. The Pro 5300M uses 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 192.0 GB/s bandwidth and 1500 MHz memory clock (12 Gbps effective). The R7 M380 uses 4 GB of DDR3 on the same 128-bit bus but only achieves 32.00 GB/s bandwidth at 1000 MHz (2 Gbps effective). That is a six-fold bandwidth advantage for the Pro 5300M, which is critical for memory-bound workloads. The Pro 5300M also supports PCIe 4.0 x8, while the R7 M380 uses PCIe 3.0 x16. Both support DirectX 12, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan, but the Pro 5300M's DirectX 12_1 feature level exceeds the R7 M380's 12 (11_1), and the Pro 5300M's Vulkan 1.4 is newer than the R7 M380's 1.2.170. The Pro 5300M has no power connectors and an 85 W TDP; the R7 M380 has no TDP listed.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher compute performance?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 5300M delivers 3.200 TFLOPS FP32, while the AMD Radeon R7 M380 delivers 1,171.2 GFLOPS FP32. The Pro 5300M also offers 6.400 TFLOPS FP16, a capability the R7 M380 lacks entirely.

Q: How do their memory systems compare?

A: The Pro 5300M uses 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 192.0 GB/s bandwidth. The R7 M380 also has 4 GB but uses DDR3 on a 128-bit bus with only 32.00 GB/s bandwidth. The Pro 5300M's bandwidth is six times higher.

Q: What is the process node difference?

A: The Pro 5300M is built on TSMC's 7 nm process, while the R7 M380 uses TSMC's 28 nm process. The Pro 5300M fits 6,400 million transistors on a 158 mm² die, compared to 1,500 million on a 123 mm² die for the R7 M380.

Q: Why is the Geekbench OpenCL gap so large?

A: The Pro 5300M scores 29252 versus 9313 for the R7 M380, a 214.1% difference. This stems from the Pro 5300M's doubled shading units (1280 vs 640), higher clocks (1250 MHz boost vs 915 MHz boost), and vastly superior memory bandwidth (192.0 GB/s vs 32.00 GB/s).

Q: Do both GPUs support the same APIs?

A: Both support DirectX 12, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan, but the Pro 5300M has a higher DirectX feature level (12_1 vs 11_1) and a newer Vulkan version (1.4 vs 1.2.170). The Pro 5300M also supports PCIe 4.0 x8, while the R7 M380 is limited to PCIe 3.0 x16.

Q: Which GPU has better overall benchmark standing?

A: The Pro 5300M sits at the 48th percentile of all GPUs with an average score of 10013, while the R7 M380 sits at the 46th percentile with an average score of 9313. The Pro 5300M's nearest rival is the NVIDIA Quadro K5100M at 10043 (0.3% higher), and the R7 M380's nearest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M at 9302 (0.1% lower).

The Verdict

The AMD Radeon Pro 5300M is the clear choice for any workload requiring compute performance. Its 214.1% lead in Geekbench OpenCL over the R7 M380 is not a marginal improvement but a generational leap. The Pro 5300M's 1280 shading units, 3.200 TFLOPS FP32, and 192.0 GB/s bandwidth position it as a competent mid-range mobile GPU, evidenced by its 48th percentile standing and average score of 10013, which rivals the NVIDIA Quadro K5100M and GeForce GTX 870M. The R7 M380, with 640 shading units, 1,171.2 GFLOPS FP32, and 32.00 GB/s bandwidth, is a legacy part from the GCN 1.0 era, sitting at the 46th percentile with an average score of 9313, just ahead of the GeForce GTX 850M and GeForce GTX 960.

Release timing reinforces the gap: the Pro 5300M launched on 2019-11-12, while the R7 M380 launched on 2015-05-04, over four years earlier. The Pro 5300M's RDNA 1.0 architecture on 7 nm with GDDR6 memory is fundamentally more modern than the R7 M380's GCN 1.0 on 28 nm with DDR3. For users selecting between these two, the data provides no scenario where the R7 M380 wins. The only question is whether the R7 M380's lower specifications—half the shading units, half the TMUs, half the ROPs, one-sixth the memory bandwidth—would ever suffice for light workloads where its simplicity is an asset. However, given the Pro 5300M's superior performance across every measurable metric, the verdict is unambiguous: the Pro 5300M is the superior GPU.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every specification category. The Pro 5300M uses the Navi 14 chip on RDNA 1.0 architecture at 7 nm, while the R7 M380 uses the Tropo chip on GCN 1.0 architecture at 28 nm. Transistor count is 6,400 million versus 1,500 million, and die size is 158 mm² versus 123 mm². The Pro 5300M has 1280 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, compared to 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. Base clocks are 1000 MHz versus 900 MHz, and boost clocks are 1250 MHz versus 915 MHz. Memory type is GDDR6 versus DDR3, with the same 4 GB capacity and 128-bit bus width, but bandwidth is 192.0 GB/s versus 32.00 GB/s. Memory clocks are 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective) versus 1000 MHz (2 Gbps effective). FP32 performance is 3.200 TFLOPS versus 1,171.2 GFLOPS, and FP16 is 6.400 TFLOPS (2:1) versus none listed. The Pro 5300M has an 85 W TDP and no power connectors, while the R7 M380 has no TDP listed. Bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x8 versus PCIe 3.0 x16. DirectX support is 12 (12_1) versus 12 (11_1), and Vulkan is 1.4 versus 1.2.170. The Pro 5300M's display outputs are portable-device-dependent, while the R7 M380 has none listed. Release dates are 2019-11-12 versus 2015-05-04. The R7 M380 lists a predecessor (Solar System) and successor (Polaris Mobile); the Pro 5300M lists neither.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon Pro 5300M wins in every benchmark category where data exists. In Geekbench OpenCL, it scores 29252 versus 9313, a 214.1% advantage. Its additional benchmark results—Geekbench Metal at 33626, Geekbench Vulkan at 27912, Passmark G3D at 5918, and Passmark GPU Compute at 2658—show consistent strength across compute and graphics workloads. The Pro 5300M is suited for tasks that leverage modern APIs, high memory bandwidth, and FP16 compute, given its 6.400 TFLOPS FP16 capability and DirectX 12_1 support. Its 48th percentile ranking and average score of 10013 place it in the same performance tier as the NVIDIA Quadro K5100M and GeForce GTX 870M.

The AMD Radeon R7 M380 has no benchmark wins in the data. Its single Geekbench OpenCL score of 9313 places it at the 46th percentile, just 0.1% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M and 0.2% ahead of the GeForce GTX 465. Its strengths are limited to its 4 GB memory capacity and 128-bit bus width, which match the Pro 5300M, but its DDR3 memory and 32.00 GB/s bandwidth severely constrain its performance. The R7 M380 could theoretically be used for basic display output or legacy applications that do not demand high throughput, but the data provides no workload where it outperforms the Pro 5300M. For any use case requiring compute, modern API support, or memory bandwidth, the Pro 5300M is the only viable option between the two.