Radeon R9 380X vs RTX A400

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.

Radeon R9 380X vs RTX A400 FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with Ryzen 7 9800X3D to isolate GPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

Radeon R9 380X vs RTX A400: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each GPU makes more sense in practice: raw FPS, VRAM, features, power draw, pricing, and long-term headroom.

Radeon R9 380X

2015

Why buy it

✅83.9% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.

Trade-offs

❌2015 hardware with 4 GB of VRAM already sits in legacy territory for modern games.
❌
69.6% HIGHER MSRP
$229 MSRPvs$135 MSRP
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 26.8 vs 44.3 G3D/$ ($229 MSRP vs $135 MSRP).
❌400% higher power demand at 250W vs 50W.

RTX A400

2024

Why buy it

✅Costs $94 less on MSRP ($135 MSRP vs $229 MSRP).
✅Delivers 65.5% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 44.3 vs 26.8 G3D/$ ($135 MSRP vs $229 MSRP).
✅Better long-term bet: Ampere (2020−2025) on 8nm gives it a newer hardware base for upcoming games.
✅Draws 50W instead of 250W, a 200W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower average FPS than Radeon R9 380X across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.

Quick Answers

Which GPU is faster for gaming right now?

Radeon R9 380X is the faster gaming card right now. In our data, it leads by 83.9% in average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data and by 2.5% in PassMark G3D (6,131 vs 5,983), so the answer here is pretty clean.

Which GPU is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond?

RTX A400 is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond. The case is simple: a 8nm process instead of 28nm, 6 vs 0 ray-tracing units, and a newer 2024 generation instead of 2015. That gives it the more rounded hardware package for newer games.

Which GPU is the better buy today?

RTX A400 makes the most sense to buy today. It is $94 cheaper on MSRP at $135 vs $229, and it leads G3D-per-dollar by 65.5% (44.3 vs 26.8), which is enough to swing the recommendation its way. Radeon R9 380X still makes more sense if max raw gaming performance matters more than value.

Radeon R9 380X vs RTX A400 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Radeon R9 380X

The Radeon R9 380X is manufactured by AMD. It was released in November 19 2015. It features the GCN 3.0 architecture. The boost clock speed is 970 MHz. It has 2048 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 250W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6,131 points. Launch price was $229.

RTX A400

The RTX A400 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in April 16 2024. It features the Ampere architecture. The core clock ranges from 727 MHz to 1762 MHz. It has 768 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 8 nm process technology. It features 6 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 5,983 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The Radeon R9 380X scores 6,131 and the RTX A400 reaches 5,983 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.5% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon R9 380X is built on GCN 3.0 while the RTX A400 uses Ampere, both on 28 nm vs 8 nm. Shader units: 2,048 (Radeon R9 380X) vs 768 (RTX A400). Raw compute: 3.973 TFLOPS (Radeon R9 380X) vs 2.706 TFLOPS (RTX A400). Boost clocks: 970 MHz vs 1762 MHz.

Feature	Radeon R9 380X	RTX A400
G3D Mark Score	6,131+2%	5,983
Architecture	GCN 3.0	Ampere
Process Node	28 nm	8 nm
Shading Units	2048+167%	768
Compute (TFLOPS)	3.973 TFLOPS+47%	2.706 TFLOPS
Boost Clock	970 MHz	1762 MHz+82%
ROPs	32+100%	16
TMUs	128+433%	24

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

The RTX A400 gets NVIDIA DLSS, which still tends to look cleaner in motion. The Radeon R9 380X leans on FSR, which is flexible and widely supported, but usually a bit rougher at the same settings.

Feature	Radeon R9 380X	RTX A400
Upscaling Tech	FSR Upscaling / FSR 4	Upscaling support
Frame Generation	Not Supported	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	AMD Anti-Lag	NVIDIA Reflex

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

Both cards ship with 4 GB of video memory. Memory bus width is 128-bit on the Radeon R9 380X and 128-bit on the RTX A400.

Feature	Radeon R9 380X	RTX A400
VRAM Capacity	4 GB	4 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR6
Bus Width	128-bit	128-bit

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The Radeon R9 380X draws 250W versus the RTX A400's 50W — a 133.3% difference. The RTX A400 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 500W (Radeon R9 380X) vs 350W (RTX A400). Power connectors: 2x 6-pin vs PCIe-powered.

Feature	Radeon R9 380X	RTX A400
TDP	250W	50W-80%
Recommended PSU	500W	350W-30%
Power Connector	2x 6-pin	PCIe-powered
Length	221mm	—
Height	111mm	—
Slots	2	—
Temp (Load)	75	—
Perf/Watt	24.5	119.7+389%

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Radeon R9 380X came in at $229, while the RTX A400 launched at $135. On MSRP, RTX A400 was 41% cheaper ($94 less). Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 26.8 (Radeon R9 380X) vs 44.3 (RTX A400) — the RTX A400 offers 65.3% better value. The newer card here is RTX A400 (2024 vs 2015).

Feature	Radeon R9 380X	RTX A400
MSRP	$229	$135-41%
Performance per Dollar	26.8	44.3+65%
Codename	Antigua	GA107
Release	November 19 2015	April 16 2024
Ranking	#394	#397

Search Radeon R9 380X on Amazon

Search RTX A400 on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.