AMD Radeon R9 M390X vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Comparison

The Verdict

The recorded data settles this comparison decisively: the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 is the superior product in every measurable head-to-head benchmark, but the AMD Radeon R9 M390X holds a surprising edge in the aggregate database ranking. The RTX 4060 wins the single shared benchmark, Geekbench Vulkan, by a 65.2% margin, scoring 48,643 against the R9 M390X's 16,951. Yet the R9 M390X posts a higher average benchmark score of 20,662 versus the RTX 4060's 17,639, and it sits in the 66th percentile of all GPUs compared to the RTX 4060's 61st percentile. This contradiction stems from the different benchmark suites each card was tested under, not from any ambiguity in their direct performance relationship.

The RTX 4060 is the clear choice for any workload using modern APIs, ray tracing, or high-resolution textures. Its 8 GB GDDR6 memory at 272.0 GB/s bandwidth, 15.11 TFLOPS FP32 compute, and DirectX 12 Ultimate support place it in a different performance class. The R9 M390X, with 4 GB GDDR5 at 160.0 GB/s, 2.961 TFLOPS, and DirectX 12 (12_0) support, remains relevant only for legacy applications or systems constrained to its MXM form factor. The data shows no scenario where the R9 M390X outperforms the RTX 4060 in a shared test. The RTX 4060's higher TDP of 115 W versus 75 W reflects its substantially larger compute resources and memory subsystem. For users with a PCIe 4.0 slot and a 300 W power supply recommendation, the RTX 4060 is the unambiguous selection.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs represent entirely different architectural eras. The R9 M390X uses AMD's GCN 3.0 architecture on a 28 nm process from TSMC, built around the Amethyst chip. It packs 5,000 million transistors into a 366 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 13.7 million per square millimeter. The RTX 4060 uses NVIDIA's Ada Lovelace architecture on a 5 nm process, also from TSMC, with the AD107 chip. It contains 18,900 million transistors in a much smaller 159 mm² die, achieving a density of 118.9 million per square millimeter, roughly 8.7 times denser.

The compute resources differ sharply. The R9 M390X has 2,048 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The RTX 4060 has 3,072 shading units, 96 TMUs, and 48 ROPs. The RTX 4060 also brings dedicated hardware the R9 M390X lacks entirely: 24 ray tracing cores and 96 tensor cores. These enable features like hardware-accelerated ray tracing and DLSS, which the R9 M390X cannot access. The FP32 throughput tells the story: 15.11 TFLOPS for the RTX 4060 versus 2.961 TFLOPS for the R9 M390X, a factor of 5.1. FP16 performance is identical to FP32 on both cards at a 1:1 ratio.

Memory architecture also diverges. The R9 M390X uses 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 160.0 GB/s. The RTX 4060 uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, but with much faster memory clocks it reaches 272.0 GB/s. The RTX 4060's memory clock is 2125 MHz (17 Gbps effective), while the R9 M390X runs at 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective). The RTX 4060's smaller bus is compensated by higher per-pin throughput. Pixel and texture rates confirm the generational leap: 118.1 GPixel/s and 236.2 GTexel/s for the RTX 4060 versus 23.14 GPixel/s and 92.54 GTexel/s for the R9 M390X.

API support further separates them. The R9 M390X supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The RTX 4060 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The newer DirectX 12 Ultimate feature set enables advanced effects like mesh shaders and variable rate shading that the older card cannot process. The RTX 4060 also uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the R9 M390X uses PCIe 3.0 x16. The physical form factors differ as well: the R9 M390X is an MXM module with no power connectors, while the RTX 4060 is a dual-slot card with one 12-pin connector and dimensions of 240 mm by 111 mm by 40 mm.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 4060 wins every benchmark category where both cards have recorded data. In the single direct comparison, Geekbench Vulkan, it scores 48,643 against 16,951, a 65.2% advantage. The RTX 4060's additional benchmark results show broad strength across API generations: Passmark DirectX 9 scores 236, DirectX 10 scores 103, DirectX 11 scores 175, DirectX 12 scores 76, and DirectX 11 compute via Passmark GPU Compute scores 9,213. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 95,057 and Passmark G3D score of 19,545 further demonstrate its compute and rasterization prowess. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2,302 confirms modern API performance. Passmark G2D at 1,037 indicates strong 2D acceleration.

The R9 M390X's wins are not performance-based but contextual. Its average benchmark score of 20,662 exceeds the RTX 4060's 17,639, driven by its two recorded tests: Geekbench Metal at 24,373 and Geekbench Vulkan at 16,951. The Metal score reflects Apple-focused compute workloads, a domain where the R9 M390X shows relative strength. The R9 M390X also has a lower TDP at 75 W versus 115 W, making it suitable for power-constrained mobile or embedded MXM implementations. Its 256-bit memory bus and 128 TMUs provide a wider parallel path for certain older workloads, though the bandwidth deficit to the RTX 4060 limits practical benefits. The R9 M390X's 66th percentile ranking versus the RTX 4060's 61st percentile reflects its position among all GPUs in the database, but this is an artifact of the different benchmark suites applied to each card.

For gaming, the RTX 4060's ray tracing cores and tensor cores enable features the R9 M390X cannot offer. For compute, the RTX 4060's 15.11 TFLOPS dwarfs the R9 M390X's 2.961 TFLOPS. For legacy DirectX 9 and DirectX 10 titles, the RTX 4060 still leads based on its Passmark scores. The R9 M390X's only practical advantage is its MXM form factor for modular laptops and its lower power draw.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in the shared benchmark?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 wins the only direct head-to-head test, Geekbench Vulkan, with a score of 48,643 versus the R9 M390X's 16,951, a 65.2% margin.

Q: Why does the R9 M390X have a higher average benchmark score?

A: The R9 M390X averages 20,662 across its two recorded tests, including a strong Geekbench Metal score of 24,373, while the RTX 4060 averages 17,639 across ten tests. The RTX 4060's broader test suite includes lower API-level scores that pull its average down.

Q: Does the R9 M390X support ray tracing?

A: No. The R9 M390X has no ray tracing cores, while the RTX 4060 includes 24 dedicated ray tracing cores.

Q: What memory advantages does each card have?

A: The RTX 4060 has 8 GB of GDDR6 with 272.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the R9 M390X has 4 GB of GDDR5 with 160.0 GB/s. The RTX 4060's memory clock is 2125 MHz (17 Gbps effective) versus 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective) for the R9 M390X.

Q: Which card is more power efficient?

A: The R9 M390X has a lower TDP of 75 W versus the RTX 4060's 115 W, but the RTX 4060 delivers 15.11 TFLOPS FP32 compute, approximately 5.1 times the R9 M390X's 2.961 TFLOPS, meaning its performance-per-watt is substantially higher.

Q: What is the form factor difference?

A: The R9 M390X is an MXM module with no power connectors, designed for portable devices. The RTX 4060 is a dual-slot card measuring 240 mm by 111 mm by 40 mm, requiring one 12-pin power connector and a recommended 300 W power supply.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains exactly one direct comparison between these two GPUs. In Geekbench Vulkan, the RTX 4060 scores 48,643, while the R9 M390X scores 16,951. The delta percentage of -65.2% indicates the R9 M390X trails by that amount. This is not a close contest; the RTX 4060 delivers roughly three times the Vulkan performance. Vulkan is a cross-platform graphics and compute API, and the results reflect the RTX 4060's advantages in shading units (3,072 versus 2,048), FP32 throughput (15.11 versus 2.961 TFLOPS), and memory bandwidth (272.0 versus 160.0 GB/s).

The RTX 4060's other benchmark scores provide context for its capabilities. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 95,057 indicates strong general-purpose compute, while its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2,302 shows modern DirectX 12 rendering performance. Passmark results span API generations: DirectX 9 at 236, DirectX 10 at 103, DirectX 11 at 175, DirectX 12 at 76, and GPU Compute at 9,213. The G3D score of 19,545 and G2D score of 1,037 complete the picture. The R9 M390X's Geekbench Metal score of 24,373 is its only other recorded data point, and while it is respectable for a 2015 GPU, it does not approach the RTX 4060's compute output.

The wins tally confirms the hierarchy: the RTX 4060 records 1 win in head-to-head benchmarks, the R9 M390X records 0. No test in the database shows the R9 M390X ahead. The largest margin in either direction is the Vulkan test itself, where the RTX 4060 leads by 31,692 points. The nearest rivals data places the R9 M390X among GPUs like the AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT (average score 20,713, delta -0.2%) and Intel Arc A750 (20,582, delta 0.4%), while the RTX 4060 sits near the AMD Radeon HD 7790 (17,666, delta -0.2%) and AMD Radeon 780M (17,588, delta 0.3%). These groupings reflect the different benchmark suites applied, not comparable performance tiers.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two GPUs:

| Specification | AMD Radeon R9 M390X | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 |

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

| Architecture | GCN 3.0 | Ada Lovelace |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 5 nm |

| Transistors | 5,000 million | 18,900 million |

| Die Size | 366 mm² | 159 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 13.7M / mm² | 118.9M / mm² |

| Base Clock | None | 1830 MHz |

| Boost Clock | None | 2460 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective) | 2125 MHz (17 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 4 GB | 8 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus | 256 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 160.0 GB/s | 272.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 2048 | 3072 |

| TMUs | 128 | 96 |

| ROPs | 32 | 48 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | None | 24 |

| Tensor Cores | None | 96 |

| Pixel Rate | 23.14 GPixel/s | 118.1 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 92.54 GTexel/s | 236.2 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 2.961 TFLOPS | 15.11 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 2.961 TFLOPS (1:1) | 15.11 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 75 W | 115 W |

| Slot Width | MXM Module | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | 1x 12-pin |

| Suggested PSU | None | 300 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x8 |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a |

| DirectX | 12 (12_0) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |

| Vulkan | 1.2.170 | 1.4 |

| Dimensions | Not specified | 240 mm x 111 mm x 40 mm |

| Release Date | 2015-05-04 | 2023-05-17 |

| Predecessor | Solar System | GeForce 30 |

| Successor | Polaris Mobile | GeForce 50 |

| Launch MSRP | None | 299 USD |