AMD Radeon R7 M380 vs AMD Radeon RX 550X Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains a single direct benchmark comparison between these two mobile graphics parts: Geekbench OpenCL. In that test, the AMD Radeon RX 550X scores 9662 points against 9313 points for the AMD Radeon R7 M380, a 3.7% advantage for the RX 550X. That is a meaningful but not overwhelming margin, roughly equivalent to the gap between the RX 550X and its nearest rival, the NVIDIA Tesla C2075, which sits 0.8% behind at 10400 average score versus the RX 550X's 10481 average across all recorded tests.

The RX 550X's win in OpenCL is consistent with its broader benchmark profile. Its average benchmark score of 10481 places it at the 49th percentile of all GPUs in the database, while the R7 M380 averages 9313 and sits at the 46th percentile. That three-percentile gap suggests the RX 550X occupies a slightly higher tier of performance, though both cards are firmly in the entry-level mobile segment.

The R7 M380 does not win any head-to-head test in the database. However, its closest rival comparisons show how tightly clustered this performance class is. The R7 M380 trails the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M by just 0.1% (9302 average), sits 0.2% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 465 (9294), and leads the AMD Radeon Vega 8 by 1% (9221). These are all sub-2% deltas, meaning the R7 M380 is effectively performance-parity with several well-known GPUs from its era.

For the RX 550X, the rival picture is similar in tightness but slightly more favorable. It sits 0.8% ahead of the NVIDIA Tesla C2075 (10400), 1% behind the AMD Radeon R9 M275X (10582), 1.2% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 6500M (10362), and 1.4% behind the AMD Radeon RX 6600S (10629). The RX 550X's position in this cluster suggests it trades blows with GPUs that are more modern, though the deltas are small enough that driver optimization and workload characteristics could flip results.

The single OpenCL test also shows the RX 550X's Vulkan capability, where it scores 11299 in Geekbench Vulkan. The R7 M380 has no recorded Vulkan score, so the database cannot provide a direct comparison on that API. This absence itself is notable, as the R7 M380's Vulkan support tops out at version 1.2.170, while the RX 550X supports Vulkan 1.3, a newer specification that may offer better performance in Vulkan-based titles.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different generations of AMD's Graphics Core Next architecture, and that single fact explains most of their behavioral differences. The RX 550X uses GCN 4.0, built on the Polaris design (RX 500X generation) with the Lexa chip. The R7 M380 uses the original GCN 1.0, part of the Gem System (R7 M300 generation) with the Tropo chip. Three full architecture generations separate them, and the manufacturing process reflects that gap.

The RX 550X is fabricated on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries, while the R7 M380 uses a 28 nm process at TSMC. The smaller node allows the RX 550X to pack 2,200 million transistors into a 103 mm² die, achieving a transistor density of 21.4 million per square millimeter. The R7 M380, on the 28 nm node, contains 1,500 million transistors across a larger 123 mm² die, yielding just 12.2 million transistors per square millimeter. That is a 76% higher transistor density for the RX 550X, which explains how it can deliver competitive performance with fewer shading units.

The core configurations tell a story of different design priorities. The R7 M380 actually has more raw compute resources: 640 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 16 raster operation units. The RX 550X has 512 shading units and 32 TMUs, but also 16 ROPs. Despite having 20% fewer shaders and TMUs, the RX 550X still wins the OpenCL benchmark, which highlights the efficiency gains of the newer architecture and the much higher clock speeds.

Clock speeds are a major differentiator. The RX 550X runs at a 1100 MHz base clock and 1183 MHz boost, while the R7 M380 runs at 900 MHz base and 915 MHz boost. That is a 22% higher base clock and 29% higher boost clock for the RX 550X. The memory clocks diverge even more dramatically: the RX 550X uses 1500 MHz (6 Gbps effective) GDDR5 memory, while the R7 M380 uses 1000 MHz (2 Gbps effective) DDR3.

The memory subsystem differences are stark. Both cards have 4 GB of memory on a 128-bit bus, but the RX 550X's GDDR5 delivers 96.00 GB/s of bandwidth, exactly three times the 32.00 GB/s of the R7 M380's DDR3. Memory bandwidth is often the bottleneck for integrated and entry-level discrete GPUs, so this 200% advantage is likely a major contributor to the RX 550X's higher scores despite its smaller compute core.

Pixel and texture rates reflect the clock and bandwidth differences. The RX 550X achieves 18.93 GPixel/s and 37.86 GTexel/s, while the R7 M380 manages 14.64 GPixel/s and 36.60 GTexel/s. The pixel rate gap of about 29% closely tracks the clock speed difference, while the texture rates are nearly identical because the R7 M380 has 25% more TMUs to compensate for its lower clocks.

The FP32 compute figures are surprisingly close: the RX 550X delivers 1,211.4 GFLOPS, and the R7 M380 delivers 1,171.2 GFLOPS, a difference of only 3.4%. The RX 550X also supports FP16 at 1,211.4 GFLOPS (1:1 ratio), while the R7 M380 has no recorded FP16 capability. The near-identical FP32 numbers make the RX 550X's benchmark win largely attributable to its memory bandwidth advantage and newer feature set.

The Verdict

The data points to the AMD Radeon RX 550X as the stronger GPU overall. It wins the only available head-to-head benchmark by 3.7%, has a higher average score (10481 versus 9313), sits at a higher percentile (49th versus 46th), and offers three times the memory bandwidth. The architecture gap, three generations of GCN, also means the RX 550X supports newer API versions: DirectX 12 (12_0) versus DirectX 12 (11_1), and Vulkan 1.3 versus Vulkan 1.2.170.

For users who prioritize compute performance in OpenCL workloads, the RX 550X is the clear choice. Its 9662 OpenCL score versus 9313 for the R7 M380, combined with a Vulkan score of 11299 that the R7 M380 cannot match, gives it broader API coverage and better raw throughput in the tests that the database records. The RX 550X also achieves this with a 50 W TDP, while the R7 M380 has no recorded power draw, though the newer process node suggests better efficiency.

The R7 M380 is not without merit. Its higher shading unit count (640 versus 512) and TMU count (40 versus 32) mean it has more parallel compute resources, and its texture rate is nearly identical to the RX 550X despite much lower clocks. In texture-bound workloads that do not saturate memory bandwidth, the R7 M380 could be competitive, but the database does not contain a test that isolates this. The R7 M380 also uses a PCIe 3.0 x16 interface, double the bandwidth of the RX 550X's PCIe 3.0 x8, though this matters little for a GPU with 32.00 GB/s of memory bandwidth.

The release timing reinforces the generational divide. The RX 550X launched on 2018-12-15 with a Polaris predecessor and Vega successor, while the R7 M380 launched on 2015-05-04 with a Solar System predecessor and Polaris Mobile successor. Three and a half years of architecture development separate them, and the RX 550X's smaller die (103 mm² versus 123 mm²) with more transistors (2,200 million versus 1,500 million) shows how far manufacturing had advanced.

Users choosing between these two for a modern workload should pick the RX 550X if they need Vulkan support, higher memory bandwidth, or newer DirectX feature levels. The R7 M380 makes sense only if the specific workload is texture-heavy and insensitive to memory bandwidth, since its higher TMU count and comparable texture rate could keep it competitive. Neither card is current production, both are end-of-life, and the R7 M380's lack of a Vulkan benchmark score in the database means its Vulkan performance is unverified.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two GPUs in the database:

• Architecture: GCN 4.0 (RX 550X) versus GCN 1.0 (R7 M380)
• Generation: Polaris (RX 500X) versus Gem System (R7 M300)
• Process node: 14 nm (GlobalFoundries) versus 28 nm (TSMC)
• Transistors: 2,200 million versus 1,500 million
• Die size: 103 mm² versus 123 mm²
• Transistor density: 21.4M / mm² versus 12.2M / mm²
• Base clock: 1100 MHz versus 900 MHz
• Boost clock: 1183 MHz versus 915 MHz
• Memory clock: 1500 MHz (6 Gbps effective) versus 1000 MHz (2 Gbps effective)
• Memory type: GDDR5 versus DDR3
• Memory bandwidth: 96.00 GB/s versus 32.00 GB/s
• Shading units: 512 versus 640
• TMUs: 32 versus 40
• Pixel rate: 18.93 GPixel/s versus 14.64 GPixel/s
• Texture rate: 37.86 GTexel/s versus 36.60 GTexel/s
• FP32: 1,211.4 GFLOPS versus 1,171.2 GFLOPS
• FP16: 1,211.4 GFLOPS (1:1) versus not recorded
• TDP: 50 W versus not recorded
• Slot width: Dual-slot versus not recorded
• Power connectors: None versus not recorded
• Suggested PSU: 250 W versus not recorded
• Bus interface: PCIe 3.0 x8 versus PCIe 3.0 x16
• Display outputs: 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0b, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a versus not recorded
• DirectX: 12 (12_0) versus 12 (11_1)
• Vulkan: 1.3 versus 1.2.170
• Dimensions: 145 mm (5.7 inches) length versus not recorded
• Release date: 2018-12-15 versus 2015-05-04
• Predecessor: Polaris versus Solar System
• Successor: Vega versus Polaris Mobile

Fields that are identical include memory size (4 GB), bus width (128 bit), ROPs (16), OpenGL version (4.6), manufacturer (AMD), and production status (end-of-life).

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in the recorded benchmark?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 550X wins the only head-to-head test, Geekbench OpenCL, with a score of 9662 versus 9313 for the R7 M380, a 3.7% advantage.

Q: How much memory bandwidth does each card have?

A: The RX 550X has 96.00 GB/s from GDDR5 memory, while the R7 M380 has 32.00 GB/s from DDR3 memory. Both use a 128-bit bus with 4 GB capacity.

Q: Do both cards support the same DirectX version?

A: No. The RX 550X supports DirectX 12 (12_0), while the R7 M380 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), a lower feature level.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The R7 M380 has 640 shading units, while the RX 550X has 512. The RX 550X still wins the OpenCL benchmark despite having 20% fewer shaders.

Q: What is the performance gap between the two in the database's percentile ranking?

A: The RX 550X sits at the 49th percentile of all GPUs with an average score of 10481, while the R7 M380 sits at the 46th percentile with an average score of 9313.

Q: Does the R7 M380 have a recorded Vulkan benchmark score?

A: No. The database only records a Geekbench OpenCL score (9313) for the R7 M380. The RX 550X has both an OpenCL score (9662) and a Vulkan score (11299).