AMD Radeon R9 M380 vs AMD Radeon RX 7600 Comparison

# AMD Radeon R9 M380 vs AMD Radeon RX 7600

The AMD Radeon R9 M380, a 2015-era mobile GPU built on GCN 2.0, and the AMD Radeon RX 7600, an active desktop part from the RDNA 3.0 generation, represent two distinct eras of AMD graphics. The data shows a decisive generational shift: in the only shared benchmark, Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 7600 scores 88,051 against the R9 M380’s 12,565, a delta of -85.7% from the RX 7600’s perspective. That performance gap is enormous, but the R9 M380’s average benchmark score of 15,521 sits remarkably close to the RX 7600’s 15,171 average, illustrating how different workloads and API paths can produce divergent results. The RX 7600 holds a 57th percentile ranking among all GPUs, while the R9 M380 sits at the 58th percentile, yet the OpenCL comparison reveals the RX 7600 is roughly 7x faster in that specific compute test.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The single direct comparison available—Geekbench OpenCL—paints a stark picture. The AMD Radeon RX 7600 delivers 88,051 points, while the AMD Radeon R9 M380 manages only 12,565 points. This represents an 85.7% deficit for the older card, meaning the RX 7600 outperforms the R9 M380 by a factor of approximately 7x in this compute workload. Such a margin is not incremental; it reflects a fundamental architectural leap rather than a simple clock-speed advantage.

Looking at broader benchmark standings, the R9 M380’s average score of 15,521 places it within 0.2% of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti (15,548) and 1.5% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060 (15,290). That is a surprising result for a 2015 mobile GPU, suggesting that in certain legacy or compute-oriented tests, the R9 M380 punches well above its expected weight class. Conversely, the RX 7600’s average score of 15,171 sits just 0.2% behind the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM (15,199) and 0.7% behind the AMD Radeon 680M (15,270). The RX 7600 also edges out the AMD Radeon Pro 560X by 0.6% (15,082) and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 Ti by 0.7% (15,063).

The discrepancy between the OpenCL result and the average scores warrants attention. The RX 7600’s OpenCL score is nearly 5.8x its own average benchmark score, while the R9 M380’s OpenCL score is actually below its average. This suggests the R9 M380 performs relatively better in other test suites, likely DirectX-based or older workloads where its GCN architecture retains efficiency. The RX 7600, by contrast, shows extreme strength in OpenCL compute but may be bottlenecked in other synthetic tests that do not leverage its full feature set.

FAQ

Q: How does the R9 M380 compare to the RX 7600 in raw compute performance?

A: In Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 7600 scores 88,051 versus the R9 M380’s 12,565, an 85.7% advantage for the RX 7600. This is the only benchmark where both GPUs were tested directly.

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The R9 M380 has an average score of 15,521, which is 2.3% higher than the RX 7600’s 15,171 average. However, this average is derived from different benchmark suites, so direct comparability is limited.

Q: What are the nearest rivals for each GPU?

A: The R9 M380’s closest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti, with a 0.2% score difference. The RX 7600’s closest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM, also at a 0.2% difference.

Q: Does the RX 7600 support ray tracing?

A: Yes, the RX 7600 features 32 ray tracing cores. The R9 M380 has no ray tracing cores listed in its specifications.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The RX 7600 offers 288.0 GB/s bandwidth with 8 GB GDDR6, while the R9 M380 provides 96.00 GB/s with 4 GB GDDR5. The RX 7600 has 3x the bandwidth.

Q: How do their percentiles compare among all GPUs?

A: The R9 M380 ranks at the 58th percentile, slightly above the RX 7600’s 57th percentile, despite the RX 7600’s superior raw compute in OpenCL.

Architecture Differences

The R9 M380 is built on the GCN 2.0 architecture using the Strato chip, fabricated on TSMC’s 28 nm process. It packs 2,080 million transistors into a 160 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 13.0 million per mm². The architecture is from the Gem System generation (R9 M300 series), with a predecessor in Solar System and a successor in Polaris Mobile. GCN 2.0 was designed for compute-heavy workloads, which explains the R9 M380’s strong relative performance in certain legacy benchmarks.

The RX 7600, in contrast, uses the RDNA 3.0 architecture with the Navi 33 chip, codenamed Hotpink Bonefish, on a 6 nm TSMC process. It contains 13,300 million transistors across a 204 mm² die, achieving a transistor density of 65.2 million per mm²—five times the density of the older chip. The RX 7600 belongs to the Navi III (RX 7000) generation, succeeding Navi II and preceding Navi IV. RDNA 3.0 is a fundamentally different design philosophy, prioritizing gaming efficiency and ray tracing over pure compute throughput.

The R9 M380 has 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 16 ROPs. The RX 7600 scales this dramatically to 2,048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. Critically, the RX 7600 introduces 32 ray tracing cores, a feature entirely absent from the R9 M380. The FP32 compute rate tells the story: the R9 M380 delivers 1.536 TFLOPS, while the RX 7600 hits 21.75 TFLOPS. The RX 7600 also offers FP16 at 21.75 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, whereas the R9 M380 lists no FP16 capability.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs diverge across nearly every specification category. The R9 M380 operates at a base clock of 900 MHz and boosts to 1000 MHz, while the RX 7600 runs at 1720 MHz base and 2655 MHz boost, with a game clock of 2250 MHz. Memory configurations differ substantially: the R9 M380 uses 4 GB of GDDR5 at 1500 MHz (6 Gbps effective) on a 128-bit bus, yielding 96.00 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 7600 uses 8 GB of GDDR6 at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) on the same 128-bit bus, but achieves 288.0 GB/s bandwidth—exactly three times higher.

Process node and power characteristics are also distinct. The R9 M380 is a 28 nm chip with no listed TDP, while the RX 7600 is a 6 nm part with a 165 W TDP, dual-slot cooler, a single 8-pin power connector, and a recommended 450 W PSU. The bus interface differs: PCIe 3.0 x16 for the R9 M380 versus PCIe 4.0 x8 for the RX 7600. Display outputs are only specified for the RX 7600, which offers 1x HDMI 2.1a and 3x DisplayPort 2.1. API support also differs: the R9 M380 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170, while the RX 7600 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Physical dimensions are listed only for the RX 7600: 204 mm length and 115 mm height.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 7600 wins decisively in modern compute and gaming workloads. Its OpenCL score of 88,051 is a clear indicator of raw compute superiority, and the 32 ray tracing cores enable hardware-accelerated ray tracing that the R9 M380 cannot perform at all. The 21.75 TFLOPS FP32 throughput, 169.9 GPixel/s pixel rate, and 339.8 GTexel/s texture rate dwarf the R9 M380’s 16.00 GPixel/s and 48.00 GTexel/s. The RX 7600 also benefits from 8 GB of memory versus 4 GB, and triple the bandwidth, making it suitable for modern high-resolution textures and 1440p-class gaming. Its DirectX 12 Ultimate support ensures compatibility with the latest game features.

The R9 M380’s wins are more contextual. Its average benchmark score of 15,521 is slightly higher than the RX 7600’s 15,171, and its 58th percentile ranking edges out the RX 7600’s 57th. In legacy DirectX 10 and DirectX 11 workloads, the R9 M380’s GCN architecture may retain efficiency, as suggested by its competitive average score despite a much lower OpenCL result. The R9 M380 also has a lower power footprint with no listed TDP, making it suitable for older laptops or systems with limited cooling. Its PCIe 3.0 x16 interface is more conventional for older platforms, whereas the RX 7600’s PCIe 4.0 x8 requires a compatible motherboard for full performance.

For users with modern systems, the RX 7600 is the clear choice: it offers 7x the OpenCL performance, ray tracing, and future-proofing through DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4. For those maintaining legacy systems or running older software, the R9 M380’s higher average score and percentile ranking suggest it remains functional in specific niches, though its end-of-life production status and lack of modern features limit its long-term viability. The data ultimately shows a generational chasm in raw performance, with the RX 7600’s architectural advantages far outweighing the R9 M380’s synthetic benchmark quirks.