Radeon Pro Vega 16 vs Radeon R9 M395

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.

Value Upgrade Path

This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.•
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Per Dollar Radeon R9 M395

#61

GeForce RTX 2070 (móvel)

MSRP: $800|Avg: $350

94%

#273

Radeon RX 550X (móvel)

MSRP: $35|Avg: $35

660%

#275

GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $150

598%

#276

GeForce GTX 1060 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $100

597%

#280

GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50

543%

#281

Radeon RX 6300

MSRP: $60|Avg: $40

539%

#283

Radeon R9 M395

MSRP: $300|Avg: $300

100%

#285

GeForce GT 755M SLI

MSRP: $200|Avg: $50

100%

#286

GeForce GTX 950A

MSRP: $159|Avg: $30

99%

#288

Radeon 540X

MSRP: $99|Avg: $40

98%

#289

GeForce 930MX

MSRP: $80|Avg: $25

97%

#291

GeForce MX250

MSRP: $150|Avg: $150

96%

#292

Radeon 630

MSRP: $100|Avg: $50

96%

#293

GeForce MX330

MSRP: $150|Avg: $100

95%

#297

Radeon RX 780

MSRP: $499|Avg: $721

93%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

⚠️ Generational Difference

The Radeon Pro Vega 16 uses modern memory architecture. The Radeon Pro Vega 16 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Radeon R9 M395 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.

🚀 Performance Leadership

The Radeon R9 M395 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.6% higher G3D Mark score and 100+% more VRAM (2 GB vs 0 MB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Radeon Pro Vega 16.

Insight	Radeon Pro Vega 16	Radeon R9 M395
Performance	❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.6%)	✅Leading raw performance (+2.6%)
Longevity	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2018 / GCN 5.0 (2017−2020))	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / GCN (2012−2015))
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	❌ Less VRAM capacity	✅ More VRAM (+100+%)
Efficiency	Normal Efficiency	Normal Efficiency
Case Fit	—	—

💎 Value Proposition

While current pricing data is unavailable, the Radeon R9 M395 remains the clear technical winner. Check real-time availability to determine if the performance gap justifies the market price.

Performance Check

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 7800X3D 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.

Radeon Pro Vega 16 Benchmark Check

Radeon R9 M395 Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Radeon Pro Vega 16 and Radeon R9 M395

Radeon Pro Vega 16

The Radeon Pro Vega 16 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in November 14 2018. It features the GCN 5.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 815 MHz to 1190 MHz. It has 1024 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 4,809 points.

Radeon R9 M395

The Radeon R9 M395 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in June 9 2015. It features the GCN architecture. The core clock speed is 834 MHz. It has 1792 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 4,934 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The Radeon Pro Vega 16 scores 4,809 and the Radeon R9 M395 reaches 4,934 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.6% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon Pro Vega 16 is built on GCN 5.0 while the Radeon R9 M395 uses GCN, both on 14 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 1,024 (Radeon Pro Vega 16) vs 1,792 (Radeon R9 M395).

Feature	Radeon Pro Vega 16	Radeon R9 M395
G3D Mark Score	4,809	4,934+3%
Architecture	GCN 5.0	GCN
Process Node	14 nm	28 nm
Shading Units	1024	1792+75%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	Radeon Pro Vega 16	Radeon R9 M395
Upscaling Tech	FSR 1.0 (Software)	FSR 1.0 (Software)
Frame Generation	Not Supported	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	AMD Anti-Lag	AMD Anti-Lag

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The Radeon Pro Vega 16 comes with 0 MB of VRAM, while the Radeon R9 M395 has 2 GB. The Radeon R9 M395 offers 100+% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 256-bit.

Feature	Radeon Pro Vega 16	Radeon R9 M395
VRAM Capacity	Shared System RAM	2 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Bus Width	64-bit	256-bit+300%

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (12_1) (Radeon Pro Vega 16) vs 12 (FL12_0) (Radeon R9 M395). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.2. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 3.

Feature	Radeon Pro Vega 16	Radeon R9 M395
DirectX	12 (12_1)	12 (FL12_0)
Vulkan	1.3+8%	1.2
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
Max Displays	4+33%	3

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: VCE 4.0 (Radeon Pro Vega 16) vs UVD (Radeon R9 M395). Decoder: UVD 7.0 vs VCE. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265 (Radeon Pro Vega 16) vs H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1,MPEG-4 (Radeon R9 M395).

Feature	Radeon Pro Vega 16	Radeon R9 M395
Encoder	VCE 4.0	UVD
Decoder	UVD 7.0	VCE
Codecs	H.264,H.265	H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1,MPEG-4

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The Radeon Pro Vega 16 draws 75W versus the Radeon R9 M395's 75W — a 0% difference. The Radeon R9 M395 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 1W (Radeon Pro Vega 16) vs 350W (Radeon R9 M395). Power connectors: Integrated vs Mobile. Card length: 0mm vs 0mm, occupying 0 vs 0 slots. Typical load temperature: 80 vs 75°C.

Feature	Radeon Pro Vega 16	Radeon R9 M395
TDP	75W	75W
Recommended PSU	1W-100%	350W
Power Connector	Integrated	Mobile
Length	0mm	0mm
Height	0mm	0mm
Slots	0	0
Temp (Load)	80	75°C-6%
Perf/Watt	64.1	65.8+3%

💰

Value Analysis

The Radeon Pro Vega 16 launched at $0 MSRP and currently averages $0, while the Radeon R9 M395 launched at $300 and now averages $300. The Radeon Pro Vega 16 costs 100+% less ($300 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): Infinity (Radeon Pro Vega 16) vs 16.4 (Radeon R9 M395) — the Radeon Pro Vega 16 offers Infinity% better value. The Radeon Pro Vega 16 is the newer GPU (2018 vs 2015).