AMD Radeon R7 M380 vs NVIDIA GRID K2 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The single recorded head-to-head benchmark between these two GPUs is the Geekbench OpenCL test, where the NVIDIA GRID K2 posts a score of 10602 against the AMD Radeon R7 M380's 9313. That translates to a 12.2% advantage for the NVIDIA card, a decisive margin in compute workloads. The GRID K2 wins the only direct comparison, and the database records one win for NVIDIA and zero for AMD in this pairing.

Context from the wider benchmark database sharpens the picture. The R7 M380's OpenCL score of 9313 places it just ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M (9302) by 0.1%, and it also edges the GTX 465 (9294) by 0.2% and the GTX 960 (9273) by 0.4%. Its nearest rival cluster is remarkably tight, with the AMD Radeon Vega 8 trailing by 1% at 9221. The R7 M380 sits at the 46th percentile among all GPUs in the database, meaning it outperforms roughly half of the recorded hardware.

The GRID K2's OpenCL result of 10602 is a different tier altogether. Its nearest rivals in the database are the GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost (8067, 0.2% behind), the GeForce 945M (8099, 0.2% ahead), the GeForce GTX 650 Ti (8053, 0.3% behind), and the GeForce GTX 880M (8040, 0.5% behind). The K2's average benchmark score, however, is lower at 8080 because it also has a Geekbench Metal score of 5557, which drags down its combined average. That Metal score is not part of the head-to-head comparison, but it explains why the K2 sits at the 42nd percentile overall despite its strong OpenCL showing. The R7 M380, by contrast, has only one recorded benchmark, so its average equals its OpenCL score.

The 12.2% delta in OpenCL is meaningful. For compute tasks that rely on OpenCL, the GRID K2 is clearly the more capable unit. The R7 M380's score, while respectable, falls into a crowded field of mid-range GPUs where hundredths of a percent separate competitors. The data indicates that in raw compute throughput, the GRID K2 holds a solid edge.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations and design philosophies. The AMD Radeon R7 M380 uses the Tropo chip built on GCN 1.0 architecture, a design that dates back to AMD's 2012-era graphics core. The GRID K2 uses NVIDIA's GK104 chip with Kepler architecture, which was also introduced in 2012 but follows a different execution model. Both are fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC, so the manufacturing node is identical, but the silicon implementations diverge sharply.

Transistor counts tell the story of scale. The R7 M380 packs 1,500 million transistors on a 123 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 12.2 million per square millimeter. The GRID K2 carries 3,540 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, with a density of 12.0 million per square millimeter. The density figures are nearly identical, but the K2 has more than twice the raw transistor budget. That scale translates into more execution resources: the GRID K2 has 1536 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 32 raster operation units. The R7 M380 has 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The K2's compute throughput is rated at 2.289 TFLOPS FP32, while the R7 M380 delivers 1,171.2 GFLOPS.

Memory configurations also differ substantially. The R7 M380 uses 4 GB of DDR3 on a 128-bit bus, providing 32.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The GRID K2 uses 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 160.0 GB/s, which is five times the memory bandwidth. The K2's memory clock is listed at 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective), while the R7 M380 runs at 1000 MHz (2 Gbps effective). The R7 M380's base clock is 900 MHz with a boost of 915 MHz; the GRID K2's clock speeds are not recorded in the database.

Pixel and texture rates follow the resource counts. The R7 M380 achieves 14.64 GPixel/s and 36.60 GTexel/s. The GRID K2 reaches 23.84 GPixel/s and 95.36 GTexel/s. In every throughput metric, the K2 is ahead. The R7 M380 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The GRID K2 supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175. API support is broadly comparable, with a minor Vulkan version difference.

Physical characteristics reflect their intended roles. The R7 M380 has no recorded TDP, slot width, or power connector requirements, suggesting it is a mobile or embedded part. The GRID K2 is a dual-slot card with a 225 W TDP, requiring a 550 W power supply and two connectors (1x 6-pin plus 1x 8-pin). It measures 267 mm (10.5 inches) in length. The GRID K2 has no display outputs, which confirms its role as a server-side compute accelerator, whereas the R7 M380's output options are not specified in the database.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins the recorded OpenCL benchmark?

A: The NVIDIA GRID K2 wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 10602 against the AMD Radeon R7 M380's 9313, a 12.2% advantage.

Q: How does the R7 M380 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The R7 M380 scores 9313 in OpenCL, which is 0.1% ahead of the GTX 850M (9302), 0.2% ahead of the GTX 465 (9294), 0.4% ahead of the GTX 960 (9273), and 1% ahead of the Radeon Vega 8 (9221).

Q: What explains the GRID K2's lower average benchmark score?

A: The GRID K2 has two recorded benchmarks: an OpenCL score of 10602 and a Metal score of 5557. Its average of 8080 reflects both, while the R7 M380's average equals its single OpenCL score of 9313.

Q: Do both GPUs use the same manufacturing process?

A: Yes, both are built on a 28 nm process at TSMC, with transistor densities of 12.2M per mm² for the R7 M380 and 12.0M per mm² for the GRID K2.

Q: Which GPU has more memory bandwidth?

A: The GRID K2 has 160.0 GB/s of bandwidth from 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, while the R7 M380 has 32.00 GB/s from 4 GB of DDR3 on a 128-bit bus.

Q: Can the GRID K2 output video to a display?

A: No, the database lists "No outputs" for the GRID K2, indicating it is designed as a compute-only card. The R7 M380's display outputs are not specified.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split based on workload and form factor. For OpenCL compute performance, the NVIDIA GRID K2 is the stronger choice. Its 10602 score beats the R7 M380's 9313 by 12.2%, and its memory bandwidth of 160.0 GB/s versus 32.00 GB/s gives it a massive advantage in bandwidth-bound tasks. The K2 also has more than double the shading units (1536 vs 640) and nearly triple the texture units (128 vs 40), which explains its higher pixel rate (23.84 GPixel/s vs 14.64 GPixel/s) and texture rate (95.36 GTexel/s vs 36.60 GTexel/s). Its FP32 throughput of 2.289 TFLOPS is roughly double the R7 M380's 1,171.2 GFLOPS.

However, the GRID K2 is a server-oriented card with no display outputs, a 225 W TDP, and a dual-slot form factor. It requires a 550 W power supply and has a launch MSRP of 5,199 USD. The R7 M380 has no recorded TDP or power connectors, suggesting a much lower power envelope suited to mobile or compact systems. The R7 M380 also has a better percentile ranking (46th vs 42nd) because of its single strong OpenCL score, while the K2's Metal score of 5557 pulls its average down.

For anyone needing OpenCL compute density in a data center or virtualized environment, the GRID K2 is the obvious pick from the benchmark data. For a mobile or low-power system where the R7 M380's unspecified thermal and power characteristics are acceptable, the R7 M380 offers respectable compute within a tight cluster of similarly performing GPUs. The choice hinges on whether the 12.2% OpenCL advantage and the fivefold memory bandwidth of the K2 justify its server-class power and physical requirements. The data favors the GRID K2 for pure compute, but the R7 M380's lower overhead makes it viable for constrained environments.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon R7 M380 | NVIDIA GRID K2 |

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

| Chip | Tropo | GK104 |

| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Kepler |

| Transistors | 1,500 million | 3,540 million |

| Die Size | 123 mm² | 294 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 12.2M / mm² | 12.0M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 900 MHz | Not recorded |

| Boost Clock | 915 MHz | Not recorded |

| Memory Clock | 1000 MHz (2 Gbps effective) | 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Type | DDR3 | GDDR5 |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 32.00 GB/s | 160.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 640 | 1536 |

| TMUs | 40 | 128 |

| ROPs | 16 | 32 |

| Pixel Rate | 14.64 GPixel/s | 23.84 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 36.60 GTexel/s | 95.36 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 1,171.2 GFLOPS | 2.289 TFLOPS |

| TDP | Not recorded | 225 W |

| Slot Width | Not recorded | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | Not recorded | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | Not recorded | 550 W |

| Display Outputs | Not recorded | No outputs |

| DirectX | 12 (11_1) | 12 (11_0) |

| Vulkan | 1.2.170 | 1.2.175 |

| Length | Not recorded | 267 mm (10.5 inches) |

| Release Date | 2015-05-04 | 2013-05-10 |

| Geekbench OpenCL | 9313 | 10602 |

| Geekbench Metal | Not recorded | 5557 |

| Average Benchmark Score | 9313 | 8080 |

| Percentile | 46 | 42 |

| Launch MSRP | Not recorded | 5,199 USD |