AMD Radeon R7 M380 vs AMD Radeon RX 6500M Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only directly comparable benchmark in the database is Geekbench OpenCL, and the result is decisively one-sided. The AMD Radeon RX 6500M scores 38,586 points, while the AMD Radeon R7 M380 manages 9,313 points. That is a 314.3% advantage for the RX 6500M, meaning it delivers roughly four times the compute performance in this workload. For a mobile GPU comparison, this is not a close contest; it is a generational gap made visible in a single metric.

Because the R7 M380 has no recorded scores for Vulkan, DirectX 9, 10, 11, 12, or compute workloads in the database, the head-to-head table is limited to this one entry. The absence of additional data points does not diminish the clarity of the OpenCL result. The RX 6500M also carries an average benchmark score of 10,362 across all recorded tests, placing it at the 48th percentile of all GPUs in the database. The R7 M380's average score is 9,313, which puts it at the 46th percentile. The percentile gap is narrow, but the raw OpenCL delta is enormous, which suggests that the R7 M380's percentile is supported by a much smaller set of measurements.

Looking at the nearest rivals for each card provides additional context. The RX 6500M sits within 2.1% of the AMD Radeon R9 M275X, within 1.1% of the AMD Radeon RX 550X, and is 0.4% below the NVIDIA Tesla C2075. It is 0.9% above the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950A. These are close competitors, which indicates that the RX 6500M's overall standing is competitive with a cluster of older or lower-tier discrete parts. The R7 M380, by contrast, is nearly identical to the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M, which is only 0.1% behind, and it sits 0.2% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 465. It is also 0.4% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 and 1% ahead of the AMD Radeon Vega 8. In other words, the R7 M380's performance class is roughly that of a mid-range mobile GPU from the GTX 800M era, while the RX 6500M operates in a higher tier despite its modest 4 GB frame buffer and narrow memory bus.

The delta between the two cards in OpenCL is not merely a matter of clock speed or core count, though those factors are substantial. The RX 6500M has a boost clock of 2400 MHz against the R7 M380's 915 MHz, and it carries 1,024 shading units versus 640. The combination of higher clocks and more compute units results in a 4.915 TFLOPS FP32 throughput for the RX 6500M, whereas the R7 M380 is rated at 1,171.2 GFLOPS. That is a roughly 4.2x difference in raw floating-point capability, which aligns well with the 314.3% OpenCL delta.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 6500M wins the only head-to-head benchmark recorded, and it also wins on every architectural metric that matters for modern workloads. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate with feature level 12_2, while the R7 M380 only reaches DirectX 12 with feature level 11_1. That means the RX 6500M can handle hardware ray tracing, mesh shaders, and variable rate shading, all features absent from the older GCN 1.0 part. The RX 6500M also supports Vulkan 1.4, whereas the R7 M380 is limited to Vulkan 1.2.170.

For gaming, the RX 6500M is the clear choice if the workload leans on modern APIs or compute-based effects. Its 16 ray accelerators provide dedicated hardware for ray-traced lighting, which the R7 M380 cannot offer at all. The RX 6500M also has a much higher texture rate of 153.6 GTexel/s versus 36.60 GTexel/s, and a pixel rate of 76.80 GPixel/s versus 14.64 GPixel/s. These figures translate directly to better fill-rate-bound scenarios, such as high-resolution texture streaming or heavy post-processing.

The R7 M380 does have one practical advantage: its 128-bit memory bus and 4 GB DDR3 frame buffer. The bus width is twice that of the RX 6500M's 64-bit interface, but the memory type is much older. DDR3 at 2 Gbps effective yields 32.00 GB/s of bandwidth, while the RX 6500M's GDDR6 at 18 Gbps effective delivers 144.0 GB/s. The R7 M380's wider bus does not compensate for the massive bandwidth deficit. In real-world terms, the RX 6500M has 4.5x the memory bandwidth, which matters more than bus width alone for texture-heavy scenes and compute workloads.

Where the R7 M380 might still be relevant is in legacy software that was built around GCN's compute behavior or older DirectX 11 pipelines. It also draws no rated TDP from the database, which could indicate that it was a low-power part in its era, but without a TDP figure, no power comparison can be made. The RX 6500M is rated at 50 W, which is modest for a modern discrete-class mobile GPU.

Architecture Differences

The RX 6500M is built on TSMC's 6 nm process using the RDNA 2.0 architecture, with the Navi 24 chip. It packs 5,400 million transistors into a 107 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 50.5 million per mm². The R7 M380 uses the much older GCN 1.0 architecture on a 28 nm process, with the Tropo chip. It contains 1,500 million transistors on a 123 mm² die, for a density of 12.2 million per mm². The process node difference alone explains a large portion of the performance gap: 6 nm versus 28 nm is a multi-generation leap in manufacturing efficiency.

The core configurations differ sharply. The RX 6500M has 1,024 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The R7 M380 has 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The RX 6500M also includes 16 dedicated ray tracing cores, which the R7 M380 lacks entirely. Neither card has tensor cores, so AI acceleration is not a differentiator here.

Memory architecture is another major split. The RX 6500M uses 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, with memory clocked at 2250 MHz and an effective data rate of 18 Gbps, producing 144.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The R7 M380 uses 4 GB of DDR3 on a 128-bit bus, with memory at 1000 MHz and 2 Gbps effective, producing only 32.00 GB/s. The RX 6500M's bandwidth advantage is substantial, and it does not need a wide bus because GDDR6 runs at much higher speeds.

The bus interface also differs: the RX 6500M uses PCIe 4.0 x4, while the R7 M380 uses PCIe 3.0 x16. In practice, the RX 6500M's narrower link is compensated by the newer standard's higher per-lane bandwidth, but the R7 M380's wider link may be more favorable for certain system configurations that rely on system memory sharing. The RX 6500M has no external power connectors and is listed as an IGP slot width, indicating it is designed for integrated or low-power mobile implementations. The R7 M380 has no listed slot width or power connector information, so no direct comparison can be made there.

API support is another clear differentiator. The RX 6500M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The R7 M380 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The gap in DirectX feature level is especially important for future-proofing, as newer games increasingly require 12_2 features for ray tracing or mesh shaders. The RX 6500M also supports FP16 compute at 9.830 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, while the R7 M380 has no FP16 rating listed in the database.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in OpenCL compute?

A: The RX 6500M scores 38,586 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the R7 M380 scores 9,313. That is a 314.3% lead for the RX 6500M.

Q: Does the R7 M380 support ray tracing?

A: No. The R7 M380 has no ray accelerator cores, while the RX 6500M includes 16 dedicated ray tracing cores.

Q: How do their memory bandwidths compare?

A: The RX 6500M has 144.0 GB/s from GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus. The R7 M380 has 32.00 GB/s from DDR3 on a 128-bit bus. The RX 6500M offers 4.5x more bandwidth.

Q: Which card has better API support for modern games?

A: The RX 6500M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The R7 M380 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The RX 6500M is the only one of the two with 12_2 features.

Q: What is the process node difference?

A: The RX 6500M is built on TSMC's 6 nm process, while the R7 M380 uses TSMC's 28 nm process. The RX 6500M also has a much higher transistor density at 50.5M per mm² versus 12.2M per mm².

Q: Are they in the same performance class?

A: No. The RX 6500M sits at the 48th percentile of all GPUs in the database, while the R7 M380 sits at the 46th percentile. However, the RX 6500M's average benchmark score of 10,362 is higher than the R7 M380's 9,313, and its OpenCL result is far ahead.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear conclusion: the AMD Radeon RX 6500M is the superior GPU in nearly every measurable way. It wins the only direct benchmark, has a significantly higher FP32 throughput (4.915 TFLOPS versus 1,171.2 GFLOPS), supports modern APIs including DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4, includes ray tracing hardware, and delivers 144.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth versus 32.00 GB/s. It is also built on a far more advanced 6 nm process with better transistor density.

The R7 M380 is an older part, released in 2015, and its architecture dates back to GCN 1.0. Its only advantage is a wider 128-bit memory bus, but that is irrelevant given the slower DDR3 memory and the overall bandwidth deficit. The R7 M380's nearest rivals are the GeForce GTX 850M, GTX 465, and GTX 960, all of which are within 0.4% of its average score. The RX 6500M's nearest rivals include the Tesla C2075, GTX 950A, RX 550X, and R9 M275X, all within 2.1%. These clusters confirm that the two cards belong to different performance tiers.

For anyone choosing between these two for a system today, the RX 6500M is the only sensible option. It is end-of-life, but so is the R7 M380. The RX 6500M is faster, more feature-complete, and built on a modern architecture. The R7 M380 should only be considered if the system requires its specific PCIe 3.0 x16 interface or if software compatibility with GCN 1.0 is a hard requirement, but even then, the performance gap is too large to justify.

Specification Differences

| Spec | AMD Radeon RX 6500M | AMD Radeon R7 M380 |

|---|---|---|

| Architecture | RDNA 2.0 | GCN 1.0 |

| Process node | 6 nm | 28 nm |

| Transistors | 5,400 million | 1,500 million |

| Die size | 107 mm² | 123 mm² |

| Transistor density | 50.5M / mm² | 12.2M / mm² |

| Base clock | 2000 MHz | 900 MHz |

| Boost clock | 2400 MHz | 915 MHz |

| Memory clock | 2250 MHz, 18 Gbps effective | 1000 MHz, 2 Gbps effective |

| Memory type | GDDR6 | DDR3 |

| Memory bus width | 64 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory bandwidth | 144.0 GB/s | 32.00 GB/s |

| Shading units | 1024 | 640 |

| TMUs | 64 | 40 |

| ROPs | 32 | 16 |

| Ray tracing cores | 16 | None |

| FP32 throughput | 4.915 TFLOPS | 1,171.2 GFLOPS |

| FP16 throughput | 9.830 TFLOPS (2:1) | Not listed |

| Pixel rate | 76.80 GPixel/s | 14.64 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 153.6 GTexel/s | 36.60 GTexel/s |

| TDP | 50 W | Not listed |

| Bus interface | PCIe 4.0 x4 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |

| DirectX support | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12 (11_1) |

| Vulkan support | 1.4 | 1.2.170 |

| Release date | 2022-01-03 | 2015-05-04 |

| Predecessor | Polaris Mobile | Solar System |

| Successor | None | Polaris Mobile |