AMD Radeon R9 M295X vs NVIDIA TITAN V Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a massive performance gulf between these two GPUs. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the NVIDIA TITAN V scores 157,265 points against 22,858 for the AMD Radeon R9 M295X. That is a 588% advantage, meaning the TITAN V delivers nearly seven times the compute throughput in this workload. The OpenCL result is the single largest margin recorded across the shared tests, and it reflects the fundamental gap in raw processing resources between a 2017 flagship desktop accelerator and a 2014 mobile-class part.

The Vulkan results tell a similar story, though with a slightly narrower spread. The TITAN V posts 152,117 points in Geekbench Vulkan, while the R9 M295X manages 29,091. The delta here is 422.9%, so the NVIDIA card is roughly 5.2 times faster in this API. Vulkan is a lower-level interface that tends to expose architectural efficiency differences, and the data suggests the Volta implementation extracts far more performance per clock from its hardware than the GCN 3.0 design.

Across the two head-to-head benchmarks, the TITAN V wins both. The R9 M295X does not record a single shared-test victory. It is worth remembering the R9 M295X has additional standalone benchmark results, including a Geekbench Metal score of 33,790, but no Metal result exists for the TITAN V in the database, so a direct comparison on Apple's graphics API is not possible from the recorded data.

The average benchmark score across all recorded tests reinforces the hierarchy. The TITAN V sits at 34,355 points, while the R9 M295X averages 28,580. That is a 20% overall gap, which is far smaller than the head-to-head deltas because the R9 M295X's Metal result and the TITAN V's multiple Passmark entries pull their respective averages in different directions. Still, the TITAN V holds the higher aggregate, and it ranks in the 79th percentile among all GPUs in the database, compared to the 74th percentile for the AMD part.

Architecture Differences

The TITAN V is built on the GV100 chip using NVIDIA's Volta architecture, fabricated on a 12 nm process at TSMC. It packs 21,100 million transistors into an 815 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 25.9 million per square millimeter. The R9 M295X uses the Amethyst chip with AMD's GCN 3.0 architecture, also from TSMC but on a 28 nm process. That older node holds 5,000 million transistors across a 366 mm² die, for a density of 13.7 million per square millimeter. The TITAN V therefore has roughly 4.2 times the transistor count, more than double the die area, and nearly double the transistor density.

The compute resources differ dramatically. The TITAN V carries 5,120 shading units, 320 texture mapping units, and 96 render output units. It also includes 640 tensor cores, which are dedicated to deep learning matrix operations. The R9 M295X has 2,048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, with no tensor cores at all. That means the TITAN V has 2.5 times the shaders, 2.5 times the TMUs, and 3 times the ROPs, before accounting for the tensor hardware.

Clock behavior also diverges. The TITAN V has a base clock of 1200 MHz and a boost clock of 1455 MHz. The R9 M295X has no base or boost clock recorded in the database, so its dynamic frequency behavior cannot be compared directly. The memory clocks are equally distinct: the TITAN V runs its HBM2 at 848 MHz with an effective data rate of 1696 Mbps, while the R9 M295X runs its GDDR5 at 1250 MHz with 5 Gbps effective.

The TITAN V's memory subsystem is in a different class. It has 12 GB of HBM2 on a 3072-bit bus, delivering 651.3 GB/s of bandwidth. The R9 M295X has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, for 160.0 GB/s. That is a 4.1x bandwidth advantage for the NVIDIA card, which matters enormously for compute-heavy workloads and high-resolution texture streaming.

API support is another distinguishing factor. The TITAN V supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The R9 M295X supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The feature level difference, 12_1 versus 12_0, means the TITAN V can expose additional DirectX 12 features that the AMD part cannot.

Where Each One Wins

The TITAN V wins across every shared benchmark, so its advantage is not workload-specific; it is a blanket superiority. The OpenCL result shows the most extreme gap, with a 588% delta, which points to compute-heavy applications like rendering, physics simulation, and machine learning inference as areas where the TITAN V is overwhelmingly faster. The Vulkan result, at 422.9% ahead, indicates that modern game engines and low-level graphics APIs also heavily favor the NVIDIA card.

The R9 M295X has no head-to-head wins. Its only unique data point is the Geekbench Metal score of 33,790, which cannot be compared directly because the TITAN V lacks a Metal result. For users locked into Apple's Metal ecosystem, the R9 M295X at least has recorded performance, but there is no evidence in the database that it outperforms the TITAN V in any comparable test.

In terms of percentile ranking, the TITAN V sits at the 79th percentile among all GPUs, while the R9 M295X sits at the 74th. The five-point gap confirms that the TITAN V is not just faster in these two specific tests; it also ranks higher in the broader distribution of GPU performance. However, the R9 M295X is not an outlier at the bottom of the database; it sits above roughly three-quarters of all recorded GPUs, which is respectable for a mobile-oriented part from 2014.

The nearest rivals for each card provide context. The TITAN V's closest neighbors are the NVIDIA RTX A1000 (0.4% higher average score), the AMD Radeon HD 7970 (0.5% lower), the NVIDIA RTX A2000 12 GB (0.6% higher), and the NVIDIA T1000 8 GB (0.6% lower). The R9 M295X sits near the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 (0.6% higher), the AMD Radeon RX 570 (0.6% lower), the AMD Radeon RX 6800M (1.0% lower), and the AMD Radeon RX 470 (1.4% lower). Notably, the R9 M295X's average score is within 1.4% of several much newer cards, which suggests its recorded average is helped by the Metal result.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in almost every measurable specification. The TITAN V uses the GV100 chip on a 12 nm process, while the R9 M295X uses Amethyst on 28 nm. Transistor counts are 21,100 million versus 5,000 million. Die size is 815 mm² versus 366 mm². Transistor density is 25.9 million per square millimeter versus 13.7 million.

Memory is 12 GB of HBM2 versus 4 GB of GDDR5. Bus width is 3072 bit versus 256 bit. Bandwidth is 651.3 GB/s versus 160.0 GB/s. Shading units are 5,120 versus 2,048. TMUs are 320 versus 128. ROPs are 96 versus 32. The TITAN V has 640 tensor cores; the R9 M295X has none.

Pixel rate is 139.7 GPixel/s for the TITAN V versus 23.14 GPixel/s for the AMD card. Texture rate is 465.6 GTexel/s versus 92.54 GTexel/s. FP32 throughput is 14.90 TFLOPS versus 2.961 TFLOPS. FP16 throughput is 29.80 TFLOPS (2:1 rate) for the TITAN V versus 2.961 TFLOPS (1:1 rate) for the R9 M295X.

TDP is listed as 250 W for both, but the physical requirements differ. The TITAN V is a dual-slot card with 1x 6-pin and 1x 8-pin power connectors, and it requires a 600 W power supply. The R9 M295X is an MXM module with no external power connectors and no suggested PSU, since it is designed to draw power from a laptop or all-in-one system's motherboard. The TITAN V uses a PCIe 3.0 x16 interface; the R9 M295X uses MXM-B (3.0). Display outputs are 1x HDMI 2.0 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a on the TITAN V, while the R9 M295X relies on the host device for display connectivity.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the NVIDIA TITAN V in OpenCL?

A: The TITAN V scores 157,265 in Geekbench OpenCL against 22,858 for the R9 M295X, a 588% advantage.

Q: Does the Radeon R9 M295X beat the TITAN V in any shared benchmark?

A: No. Across the two head-to-head tests, Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan, the TITAN V wins both.

Q: What memory configuration does each card use?

A: The TITAN V uses 12 GB of HBM2 on a 3072-bit bus with 651.3 GB/s bandwidth. The R9 M295X uses 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 160.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Do these cards support the same DirectX version?

A: Both support DirectX 12, but the TITAN V is at feature level 12_1 while the R9 M295X is at 12_0.

Q: Which card has tensor cores?

A: The NVIDIA TITAN V has 640 tensor cores. The AMD Radeon R9 M295X has no tensor cores.

Q: How do their overall database rankings compare?

A: The TITAN V sits at the 79th percentile among all GPUs with an average benchmark score of 34,355. The R9 M295X sits at the 74th percentile with an average score of 28,580.

The Verdict

The data points to a straightforward conclusion: the NVIDIA TITAN V is the far more capable GPU. It wins both shared benchmarks by enormous margins, holds a higher average score, ranks higher in the percentile distribution, and carries substantially more compute resources across every category. Its 588% OpenCL lead and 422.9% Vulkan lead are not incremental improvements; they represent a completely different performance class.

The R9 M295X is not without merit in its own context. It is an MXM module designed for portable systems, draws no external power connectors, and its 74th percentile ranking means it outperforms a majority of GPUs in the database. Its Geekbench Metal score of 33,790 provides some evidence of capability in Apple-centric workflows, though no direct comparison to the TITAN V is possible from the recorded data.

For a builder choosing between these two for desktop use, the TITAN V is the only rational pick. It has 12 GB of HBM2 memory, 640 tensor cores, 14.90 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, and it can drive multiple displays directly. The R9 M295X is a laptop-oriented part with 4 GB of GDDR5 and no standalone display outputs, so it is not a practical desktop GPU unless embedded in a compatible portable chassis.

For a user with a portable system that requires an MXM module, the R9 M295X is a functional option, but the recorded data shows it cannot compete with the TITAN V in any comparable workload. The TITAN V's launch MSRP was 2,999 USD, which reflects its position as a high-end compute card. The R9 M295X has no recorded launch MSRP, so no direct price comparison is possible. If the goal is maximum performance, particularly in compute or modern graphics APIs, the TITAN V is the clear winner. If the goal is a low-profile mobile module that fits existing MXM slots, the R9 M295X is the only one of the two that fits that form factor.