AMD Radeon R9 M295X vs AMD Radeon RX 6800S Comparison

The Verdict

The data presents a clear generational gap. The AMD Radeon RX 6800S is the definitive winner in every recorded benchmark, with wins in all three head-to-head tests. Its average benchmark score of 24063 places it near the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER, which sits at 24170 with a delta of -0.4%. The R9 M295X, despite its higher percentile rank of 74 versus 69, delivers an average score of 28580 but loses decisively in every direct comparison.

For a user deciding between these two, the choice is straightforward. The RX 6800S is the only sensible pick for modern workloads. It offers over double the performance in Metal, OpenCL, and Vulkan tests. The R9 M295X, while still competitive with mid-range cards from its era, is end-of-life and cannot keep pace with the newer architecture. The RX 6800S is also end-of-life, but its performance profile is far more relevant to current software.

The R9 M295X makes sense only for legacy systems with MXM slots that require a drop-in replacement. Its 250 W TDP and MXM-B (3.0) interface are specific to older laptops. The RX 6800S, with its 100 W TDP and IGP form factor, is designed for a different class of portable device entirely. If you are building or upgrading a modern system, the RX 6800S is the only rational choice.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs represent entirely different design philosophies and eras. The R9 M295X uses the Amethyst chip based on GCN 3.0 architecture, manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It packs 5,000 million transistors into a 366 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 13.7M per mm². This is a large, power-hungry chip designed for high-end mobile gaming in the mid-2010s.

The RX 6800S uses the Navi 23 chip based on RDNA 2.0 architecture, also built by TSMC but on a 7 nm process. It contains 11,060 million transistors in a much smaller 237 mm² die, achieving a transistor density of 46.7M per mm². This is a denser, more efficient design that delivers significantly higher performance at lower power consumption.

The architectural leap is stark. The R9 M295X supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The RX 6800S supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), which includes hardware ray tracing via its 32 RT cores, as well as OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4. The newer card also has no tensor cores listed, but its RT core count is a meaningful addition for games that use ray-traced effects.

Memory architecture differs substantially. The R9 M295X uses 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 160.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The RX 6800S uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, achieving 256.0 GB/s. Despite the narrower bus, the faster memory technology gives the newer card a 60% bandwidth advantage, which is critical for high-resolution textures and modern game engines.

The RX 6800S also features a much higher pixel rate and texture rate. Its pixel rate is 134.4 GPixel/s versus 23.14 GPixel/s for the older card, and its texture rate is 268.8 GTexel/s versus 92.54 GTexel/s. These raw throughput numbers explain why the newer card dominates in synthetic benchmarks.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data shows a complete sweep for the RX 6800S across all three Geekbench tests. The largest margin is in OpenCL, where the RX 6800S scores 73202 against 22858 for the R9 M295X, a delta of -68.8% from the perspective of the older card. This means the RX 6800S is roughly 3.2 times faster in raw compute workloads.

In Vulkan, the RX 6800S scores 81272 versus 29091, a delta of -64.2%. This is a 2.8 times improvement. Vulkan is increasingly important for modern game engines and cross-platform titles, so this advantage translates directly to playable frame rates in many current games.

The Metal test shows the smallest relative gap, but it is still massive. The RX 6800S scores 85256 against 33790, a delta of -60.4%. That is roughly 2.5 times the performance. Metal is the primary graphics API on Apple platforms, and this result indicates the RX 6800S is far more capable for any Metal-based workload.

The average benchmark score comparison reinforces this picture. The R9 M295X averages 28580 across its recorded tests, while the RX 6800S averages 24063 across a broader set of tests that includes PassMark and 3DMark. The newer card faces tougher competition in its nearest rivals: the RTX 2080 SUPER at 24170 (-0.4%), the GTX 780 Ti at 24236 (-0.7%), and the GTX 1630 at 24277 (-0.9%). The RX 6800S is within 1% of these cards, which shows it sits in a solid mid-range tier.

The R9 M295X, by contrast, is closest to the Quadro RTX 8000 at 28421 (+0.6%), the RX 570 at 28766 (-0.6%), the RX 6800M at 28874 (-1%), and the RX 470 at 28996 (-1.4%). Its performance is comparable to those cards, but all of them are older or lower-tier models. The data shows that the R9 M295X is not competitive with the RX 6800S in any measurable way.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every meaningful specification. The process node is a major divider: 28 nm for the R9 M295X versus 7 nm for the RX 6800S. Transistor count is 5,000 million versus 11,060 million, while die size is 366 mm² versus 237 mm². Transistor density is 13.7M per mm² versus 46.7M per mm².

Clock speeds are only listed for the RX 6800S, which has a base clock of 1800 MHz, a boost clock of 2100 MHz, and a game clock of 1975 MHz. The R9 M295X has no base or boost clock recorded, but its memory clock is 1250 MHz with 5 Gbps effective speed. The RX 6800S memory clock is 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective.

Memory size is 4 GB versus 8 GB. Memory type is GDDR5 versus GDDR6. Bus width is 256 bit versus 128 bit. Bandwidth is 160.0 GB/s versus 256.0 GB/s. The R9 M295X has 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The RX 6800S also has 2048 shading units and 128 TMUs, but doubles the ROPs to 64 and adds 32 RT cores.

Compute performance is dramatically different. FP32 is 2.961 TFLOPS for the R9 M295X versus 8.602 TFLOPS for the RX 6800S. FP16 is 2.961 TFLOPS (1:1) for the older card versus 17.20 TFLOPS (2:1) for the newer one. The RX 6800S has a clear advantage in both precision levels.

Power consumption is a stark contrast. The R9 M295X has a TDP of 250 W, while the RX 6800S has a TDP of 100 W. The newer card delivers far more performance at less than half the power draw. The R9 M295X uses an MXM Module slot width with MXM-B (3.0) interface, while the RX 6800S is an IGP with PCIe 4.0 x8 interface. Both have no power connectors and use portable device dependent display outputs.

Release dates are 2014-11-22 for the R9 M295X and 2022-01-03 for the RX 6800S. The older card is part of the Gem System (R9 M200) generation, while the newer one is from the Navi Mobile (RX 6000M) generation. The R9 M295X has a predecessor of Solar System and a successor of Polaris Mobile. The RX 6800S also has a successor of Polaris Mobile, which is interesting, and no recorded successor.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in Metal benchmarks?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6800S is significantly faster, scoring 85256 in geekbench_metal compared to 33790 for the R9 M295X, a delta of -60.4% from the older card's perspective.

Q: How do the two cards compare in Vulkan performance?

A: The RX 6800S scores 81272 in geekbench_vulkan, while the R9 M295X scores 29091, a delta of -64.2%. The newer card is roughly 2.8 times faster.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The R9 M295X has a TDP of 250 W, while the RX 6800S has a TDP of 100 W. The newer card uses significantly less power while delivering higher performance.

Q: Do both cards support ray tracing?

A: No. The RX 6800S has 32 RT cores and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), which includes ray tracing. The R9 M295X supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and has no RT cores listed.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The R9 M295X provides 160.0 GB/s over a 256-bit GDDR5 bus. The RX 6800S provides 256.0 GB/s over a 128-bit GDDR6 bus, a 60% increase in bandwidth despite the narrower bus.

Q: Which card is better for OpenCL compute workloads?

A: The RX 6800S is far superior, scoring 73202 in geekbench_opencl versus 22858 for the R9 M295X, a delta of -68.8%. This is roughly 3.2 times the compute performance.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 6800S wins in every recorded benchmark category. Its head-to-head record is 3 wins and 0 losses. The data shows it is faster in Metal, OpenCL, and Vulkan tests by margins between 60.4% and 68.8%. This makes it the clear choice for any modern gaming or compute workload.

The RX 6800S also wins on efficiency. At 100 W TDP, it delivers 8.602 TFLOPS of FP32 performance. The R9 M295X requires 250 W to deliver 2.961 TFLOPS. For laptops and portable devices, this efficiency advantage is crucial, as it translates to longer battery life and less heat.

The RX 6800S wins on memory capacity and bandwidth. Its 8 GB of GDDR6 memory with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth is better suited for modern game assets and high-resolution textures. The R9 M295X's 4 GB of GDDR5 with 160.0 GB/s is a bottleneck for current titles.

The R9 M295X has no wins in the recorded data. Its only potential advantage is its 256-bit memory bus, but the faster GDDR6 memory on the RX 6800S more than compensates with higher effective bandwidth. The older card's MXM form factor may be useful for specific legacy laptops, but that is a compatibility consideration, not a performance one.

For users with an MXM-based laptop from the mid-2010s, the R9 M295X could serve as a drop-in replacement if the original GPU fails. But for anyone choosing between these two for a new system, the RX 6800S is the only rational option. Its performance, efficiency, and feature set are categorically superior. The data is unambiguous: the RX 6800S is the winner in every measurable way.