
FirePro V5800
Popular choices:

Radeon R9 M265X
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook
This comparison brings together gaming FPS, raw graphics performance, VRAM, feature set, power efficiency, pricing context, and long-term value so you can see which GPU actually makes more sense.
FirePro V5800
2010Why buy it
- ✅Competitive enough if your priority is price, power, or specific feature preference.
Trade-offs
- ❌Very weak future-proofing: 2010-era hardware with 4 GB of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
- ❌139.5% HIGHER MSRP$479 MSRPvs$200 MSRP
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 2.5 vs 5.8 G3D/$ ($479 MSRP vs $200 MSRP).
Radeon R9 M265X
2014Why buy it
- ✅Costs $279 less on MSRP ($200 MSRP vs $479 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 136.1% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 5.8 vs 2.5 G3D/$ ($200 MSRP vs $479 MSRP).
- ✅More future proof: GCN 1.0 (2012−2020) on 28nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
Trade-offs
- ❌Very weak future-proofing: 2014-era hardware with 4 GB of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
FirePro V5800
2010Radeon R9 M265X
2014Why buy it
- ✅Competitive enough if your priority is price, power, or specific feature preference.
Why buy it
- ✅Costs $279 less on MSRP ($200 MSRP vs $479 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 136.1% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 5.8 vs 2.5 G3D/$ ($200 MSRP vs $479 MSRP).
- ✅More future proof: GCN 1.0 (2012−2020) on 28nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
Trade-offs
- ❌Very weak future-proofing: 2010-era hardware with 4 GB of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
- ❌139.5% HIGHER MSRP$479 MSRPvs$200 MSRP
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 2.5 vs 5.8 G3D/$ ($479 MSRP vs $200 MSRP).
Trade-offs
- ❌Very weak future-proofing: 2014-era hardware with 4 GB of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
Quick Answers
So, is FirePro V5800 better than Radeon R9 M265X?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper card?
When does Radeon R9 M265X make more sense than FirePro V5800?
Games Benchmarks
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 9800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.

Path of Exile 2
| Preset | FirePro V5800 | Radeon R9 M265X |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 22 FPS | 24 FPS |
| medium | 15 FPS | 15 FPS |
| high | 10 FPS | 10 FPS |
| ultra | 5 FPS | 5 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 16 FPS | 12 FPS |
| medium | 9 FPS | 6 FPS |
| high | 4 FPS | 3 FPS |
| ultra | 2 FPS | 2 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 5 FPS | 4 FPS |
| medium | 3 FPS | 3 FPS |
| high | 2 FPS | 1 FPS |
| ultra | 1 FPS | 1 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | FirePro V5800 | Radeon R9 M265X |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 26 FPS | 39 FPS |
| medium | 11 FPS | 20 FPS |
| high | 8 FPS | 14 FPS |
| ultra | 6 FPS | 10 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 13 FPS | 19 FPS |
| medium | 5 FPS | 11 FPS |
| high | 4 FPS | 7 FPS |
| ultra | 3 FPS | 5 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 4 FPS | 5 FPS |
| medium | 2 FPS | 3 FPS |
| high | 2 FPS | 3 FPS |
| ultra | 1 FPS | 2 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | FirePro V5800 | Radeon R9 M265X |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 53 FPS | 53 FPS |
| medium | 43 FPS | 42 FPS |
| high | 36 FPS | 35 FPS |
| ultra | 27 FPS | 26 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 40 FPS | 39 FPS |
| medium | 32 FPS | 32 FPS |
| high | 27 FPS | 26 FPS |
| ultra | 20 FPS | 20 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 27 FPS | 26 FPS |
| medium | 21 FPS | 21 FPS |
| high | 18 FPS | 18 FPS |
| ultra | 13 FPS | 13 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | FirePro V5800 | Radeon R9 M265X |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 53 FPS | 53 FPS |
| medium | 43 FPS | 42 FPS |
| high | 36 FPS | 35 FPS |
| ultra | 27 FPS | 26 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 40 FPS | 9 FPS |
| medium | 32 FPS | 7 FPS |
| high | 27 FPS | 6 FPS |
| ultra | 17 FPS | 5 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 25 FPS | 6 FPS |
| medium | 18 FPS | 4 FPS |
| high | 14 FPS | 4 FPS |
| ultra | 8 FPS | 3 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of FirePro V5800 and Radeon R9 M265X

FirePro V5800
FirePro V5800
The FirePro V5800 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in April 26 2010. It features the TeraScale 2 architecture. The core clock speed is 690 MHz. It has 800 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 74W. Manufactured using 40 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,184 points. Launch price was $479.

Radeon R9 M265X
Radeon R9 M265X
The Radeon R9 M265X is manufactured by AMD. It was released in March 21 2014. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 575 MHz to 625 MHz. It has 640 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,167 points.
Graphics Performance
The FirePro V5800 scores 1,184 and the Radeon R9 M265X reaches 1,167 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.5% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The FirePro V5800 is built on TeraScale 2 while the Radeon R9 M265X uses GCN 1.0, both on 40 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 800 (FirePro V5800) vs 640 (Radeon R9 M265X). Raw compute: 1.104 TFLOPS (FirePro V5800) vs 0.8 TFLOPS (Radeon R9 M265X).
| Feature | FirePro V5800 | Radeon R9 M265X |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 1,184+1% | 1,167 |
| Architecture | TeraScale 2 | GCN 1.0 |
| Process Node | 40 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 800+25% | 640 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.104 TFLOPS+38% | 0.8 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 16 | 16 |
| TMUs | 40 | 40 |
| L1 Cache | 80 KB | 160 KB+100% |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 256 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | FirePro V5800 | Radeon R9 M265X |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | Upscaling support | FSR Upscaling / FSR 4 |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | AMD Anti-Lag |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 4 GB of GDDR5. Bus width: 64-bit vs 128-bit.
| Feature | FirePro V5800 | Radeon R9 M265X |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 128-bit+100% |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 256 KB |
Power & Dimensions
The FirePro V5800 draws 74W versus the Radeon R9 M265X's 75W — a 1.3% difference. The FirePro V5800 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (FirePro V5800) vs 350W (Radeon R9 M265X). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs Mobile.
| Feature | FirePro V5800 | Radeon R9 M265X |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 74W-1% | 75W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | Mobile |
| Length | 229mm | — |
| Height | 111mm | — |
| Slots | 1 | — |
| Temp (Load) | 59°C | — |
| Perf/Watt | 16.0+3% | 15.6 |
Value Analysis
The FirePro V5800 launched at $479 MSRP, while the Radeon R9 M265X launched at $200. The Radeon R9 M265X costs 58.2% less ($279 savings) on MSRP. Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 2.5 (FirePro V5800) vs 5.8 (Radeon R9 M265X) — the Radeon R9 M265X offers 132% better value. The Radeon R9 M265X is the newer GPU (2014 vs 2010).
| Feature | FirePro V5800 | Radeon R9 M265X |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $479 | $200-58% |
| Performance per Dollar | 2.5 | 5.8+132% |
| Codename | Juniper | Venus |
| Release | April 26 2010 | March 21 2014 |
| Ranking | #780 | #839 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.













