AMD Radeon R9 M395X vs AMD Radeon R9 285

Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon R9 M395X and AMD Radeon R9 285 videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Technologies. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.

 

Differences

Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R9 M395X

• Videocard is newer: launch date 8 month(s) later
• Around 14% higher pipelines: 2048 vs 1792
• 2x more maximum memory size: 4 GB vs 2 GB
• Around 23% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 733 vs 597
• Around 6% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 413.329 vs 391.399
• Around 14% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 7365 vs 6474
• Around 21% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3354 vs 2782
• Around 14% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 7365 vs 6474
• Around 21% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3354 vs 2782

Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R9 285

• Around 27% higher core clock speed: 918 MHz vs 723 MHz
• Around 11% higher texture fill rate: 102.8 GTexel / s vs 92.54 GTexel / s
• Around 11% better floating-point performance: 3,290 gflops vs 2,961 gflops
• Around 32% lower typical power consumption: 190 Watt vs 250 Watt
• 4.4x more memory clock speed: 5500 MHz vs 1250 MHz
• Around 29% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 6680 vs 5195
• Around 11% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 72.799 vs 65.367
• Around 84% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1474.632 vs 799.421
• Around 11% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 6.369 vs 5.718
• Around 29% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 91.954 vs 71.057
• Around 41% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3043 vs 2154
• Around 41% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3043 vs 2154

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: AMD Radeon R9 M395X
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R9 285

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	5195 6680
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	733 597
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	65.367 72.799
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	799.421 1474.632
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	5.718 6.369
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	71.057 91.954
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	413.329 391.399
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	7365 6474
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2154 3043
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3354 2782
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	7365 6474
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2154 3043
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3354 2782

Compare specifications (specs)