AMD Radeon R7 M380 vs NVIDIA Quadro P5000 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only directly comparable benchmark in the database is Geekbench OpenCL, and the result is not close. The NVIDIA Quadro P5000 scores 52,509, while the AMD Radeon R7 M380 scores 9,313. That puts the Quadro P5000 82.3% ahead, a decisive margin that reflects the fundamental gap in compute resources between these two products. The R7 M380’s score is 46% below the Quadro P5000’s, and the delta percentage in the database confirms the Quadro P5000 wins this head-to-head outright, with 1 win versus 0 for the Radeon.

Looking at the R7 M380’s own rival set, it is essentially a peer of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M (9,302, a 0.1% difference), the GTX 465 (9,294, 0.2%), and the GTX 960 (9,273, 0.4%). It also sits just ahead of the AMD Radeon Vega 8 (9,221, 1%). In other words, the R7 M380 is not a slow chip by its own generation’s standards; it is simply outclassed by the Quadro P5000, which belongs to a completely different performance tier. The Quadro P5000’s nearest rivals in the database, by contrast, are the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 880M (8,040, 0% delta), GTX 650 Ti (8,053, -0.2%), GTX 650 Ti Boost (8,067, -0.3%), and GRID K2 (8,080, -0.5%). That is a much higher baseline, and the Quadro P5000’s average benchmark score of 8,039 reflects a card that trades blows with desktop-class parts from its era.

The data also shows the Quadro P5000 has far more benchmark coverage. It has recorded scores in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 (1,330), Geekbench Vulkan (6,342), and a full Passmark suite including DirectX 9 (170), DX10 (77), DX11 (102), DX12 (44), G2D (674), G3D (12,634), and GPU Compute (6,508). The R7 M380 has only the single Geekbench OpenCL result. That is a practical consideration for anyone comparing the two: the Quadro P5000 has been validated across multiple APIs, while the R7 M380’s data is thin.

Architecture Differences

The R7 M380 uses the Tropo chip, built on GCN 1.0 architecture, manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It packs 1,500 million transistors on a 123 mm² die, giving it a transistor density of 12.2 million per mm². The Quadro P5000 uses the GP104 chip, built on Pascal architecture, on a 16 nm process, also at TSMC. It contains 7,200 million transistors on a 314 mm² die, with a density of 22.9 million per mm². The node advantage is substantial: 16 nm versus 28 nm means the Quadro P5000 crams nearly five times the transistors into a die that is only about 2.5 times larger.

The compute units tell the same story. The R7 M380 has 640 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 16 ROPs. The Quadro P5000 has 2,560 shading units, 160 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. That is a 4x advantage in every major compute block. Pixel rate is 14.64 GPixel/s for the R7 M380 versus 110.9 GPixel/s for the Quadro P5000. Texture rate is 36.60 GTexel/s versus 277.3 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 1,171.2 GFLOPS versus 8.873 TFLOPS, an order of magnitude difference. The Quadro P5000 also has a recorded FP16 figure of 138.6 GFLOPS (at a 1:64 ratio), while the R7 M380 has no FP16 data in the database.

Memory is another major divider. The R7 M380 has 4 GB of DDR3 on a 128-bit bus, with 32.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The Quadro P5000 has 16 GB of GDDR5X on a 256-bit bus, with 288.5 GB/s of bandwidth. That is 9 times the bandwidth, which matters heavily for compute workloads and high-resolution texturing. Memory clocks also differ: the R7 M380 runs at 1000 MHz (2 Gbps effective), while the Quadro P5000 runs at 1127 MHz (9 Gbps effective). The Quadro P5000’s memory type and wider bus give it a massive throughput advantage.

API support differs as well. The R7 M380 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The Quadro P5000 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Quadro P5000 also has a specified TDP of 180 W, requires a single 8-pin power connector, and is a dual-slot card. The R7 M380 has no TDP, slot width, or power connector data recorded. The Quadro P5000’s board is 267 mm long and 111 mm tall, while the R7 M380 has no dimensions recorded.

Where Each One Wins

The R7 M380 wins in one narrow sense: it is a mobile part with lower absolute demands. Its 28 nm GCN 1.0 design, 640 shading units, and 32 GB/s of bandwidth are modest by any standard, but that also means it can fit into thin laptops without the power and cooling requirements of a 180 W dual-slot card. If the use case is a lightweight notebook for light gaming or basic GPU acceleration, the R7 M380 is the only one of the two that makes sense physically.

The Quadro P5000 wins everywhere else. Its Geekbench OpenCL score is 5.6 times higher. Its compute resources are 4 times greater in shading units, TMUs, and ROPs. Its memory bandwidth is 9 times higher. It has 4 times the VRAM (16 GB versus 4 GB), which directly affects the ability to hold large datasets, high-resolution textures, or multiple rendering targets. The Passmark G3D score of 12,634 indicates strong DirectX performance, and the GPU Compute score of 6,508 shows substantial general-purpose compute ability. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1,330 and Geekbench Vulkan score of 6,342 confirm modern API proficiency.

For professional workloads, the Quadro P5000’s 16 GB GDDR5X and 288.5 GB/s bandwidth are the kind of numbers that matter for GPU rendering, simulation, and machine learning inference. The R7 M380’s 4 GB DDR3 would bottleneck on any serious compute task. The Quadro P5000 also supports Vulkan 1.4 versus 1.2.170, which is relevant for newer applications that rely on the latest API features.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the NVIDIA Quadro P5000 than the AMD Radeon R7 M380 in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The Quadro P5000 scores 52,509, while the R7 M380 scores 9,313. That is an 82.3% advantage for the Quadro P5000.

Q: What are the closest rivals to the Radeon R7 M380 in the database?

A: The R7 M380 is within 1% of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M (9,302), GTX 465 (9,294), GTX 960 (9,273), and AMD Radeon Vega 8 (9,221).

Q: What are the closest rivals to the Quadro P5000 in the database?

A: The Quadro P5000’s nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 880M (8,040, 0% delta), GTX 650 Ti (8,053, -0.2%), GTX 650 Ti Boost (8,067, -0.3%), and GRID K2 (8,080, -0.5%).

Q: Does the R7 M380 have any benchmark results besides Geekbench OpenCL?

A: No, the database records only the Geekbench OpenCL score for the R7 M380. The Quadro P5000 has 10 recorded benchmarks, including 3DMark, Vulkan, and Passmark tests.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference between the two cards?

A: The R7 M380 has 32.00 GB/s of bandwidth with 4 GB DDR3 on a 128-bit bus. The Quadro P5000 has 288.5 GB/s with 16 GB GDDR5X on a 256-bit bus.

Q: Which card has better API support?

A: The Quadro P5000 supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, while the R7 M380 supports DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170. Both support OpenGL 4.6.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous. The NVIDIA Quadro P5000 is the superior GPU in every measurable way: compute throughput, memory capacity, memory bandwidth, pixel rate, texture rate, and API support. Its Geekbench OpenCL score is 82.3% higher, and its hardware profile is that of a workstation-class part meant for heavy rendering and compute. The AMD Radeon R7 M380, by contrast, is an entry-level mobile chip from 2015 that sits within 1% of several older NVIDIA desktop parts. If you need raw performance, you pick the Quadro P5000 without hesitation.

However, the R7 M380 has one clear advantage: it exists in a mobile form factor. The Quadro P5000 is a dual-slot, 180 W card that is 267 mm long and requires a 450 W power supply. The R7 M380 has no TDP, slot width, or power connector data, which suggests it is designed for integration into laptops where power and space are constrained. If the task is light duty and portability is mandatory, the R7 M380 is the only viable option between these two.

For anyone building a desktop workstation or needing serious GPU compute, the Quadro P5000 is the obvious choice, and its launch MSRP was 2,499 USD. For a laptop user who needs basic acceleration and cannot accommodate a dual-slot card, the R7 M380 is what the form factor dictates. There is no scenario in this data where the R7 M380 beats the Quadro P5000 on performance, but there is a scenario where it is the only one that physically fits.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon R7 M380 | NVIDIA Quadro P5000 |

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

| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Pascal |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 16 nm |

| Transistors | 1,500 million | 7,200 million |

| Die Size | 123 mm² | 314 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 12.2M / mm² | 22.9M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 900 MHz | 1607 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 915 MHz | 1733 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1000 MHz (2 Gbps effective) | 1127 MHz (9 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 4 GB | 16 GB |

| Memory Type | DDR3 | GDDR5X |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 32.00 GB/s | 288.5 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 640 | 2560 |

| TMUs | 40 | 160 |

| ROPs | 16 | 64 |

| Pixel Rate | 14.64 GPixel/s | 110.9 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 36.60 GTexel/s | 277.3 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 1,171.2 GFLOPS | 8.873 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | Not recorded | 138.6 GFLOPS (1:64) |

| TDP | Not recorded | 180 W |

| Slot Width | Not recorded | Dual-slot |

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

| Suggested PSU | Not recorded | 450 W |

| Display Outputs | Not recorded | 1x DVI, 4x DisplayPort 1.4a |

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

| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |

| Vulkan | 1.2.170 | 1.4 |

| Dimensions | Not recorded | 267 mm x 111 mm |

| Release Date | 2015-05-04 | 2016-09-30 |

| Production Status | End-of-life | End-of-life |

| Predecessor | Solar System | Quadro Maxwell |

| Successor | Polaris Mobile | Quadro Volta |