Radeon R9 M295X vs Radeon RX 6300
Radeon R9 M295X
Popular choices:
Radeon RX 6300
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.
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. The Radeon R9 M295X is positioned at rank 273 and the Radeon RX 6300 is on rank 14, so the Radeon RX 6300 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Radeon R9 M295X
Performance Per Dollar Radeon RX 6300
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The Radeon RX 6300 is significantly newer (2022 vs 2014). The Radeon RX 6300 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Radeon R9 M295X lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Radeon RX 6300 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 3.3% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Radeon R9 M295X.
| Insight | Radeon R9 M295X | Radeon RX 6300 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-3.3%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+3.3%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / GCN 3.0 (2014−2019)) | RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025) (6nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The Radeon RX 6300 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $40 versus $150 for the Radeon R9 M295X, it costs 73% less. While it maintains competitive performance, this results in a 287.3% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Radeon R9 M295X | Radeon RX 6300 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+287.3%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($150) | ✅More affordable ($40) |
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.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Radeon R9 M295X and Radeon RX 6300
Radeon R9 M295X
The Radeon R9 M295X is manufactured by AMD. It was released in November 23 2014. It features the GCN 3.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 723 MHz. It has 2048 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 250W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 5,150 points.
Radeon RX 6300
The Radeon RX 6300 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in January 4 2022. It features the RDNA 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 2000 MHz to 2400 MHz. It has 768 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 35W. Manufactured using 6 nm process technology. It features 12 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 5,319 points.
Graphics Performance
The Radeon R9 M295X scores 5,150 and the Radeon RX 6300 reaches 5,319 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 3.3% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon R9 M295X is built on GCN 3.0 while the Radeon RX 6300 uses RDNA 2.0, both on 28 nm vs 6 nm. Shader units: 2,048 (Radeon R9 M295X) vs 768 (Radeon RX 6300). Raw compute: 2.961 TFLOPS (Radeon R9 M295X) vs 3.686 TFLOPS (Radeon RX 6300).
| Feature | Radeon R9 M295X | Radeon RX 6300 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 5,150 | 5,319+3% |
| Architecture | GCN 3.0 | RDNA 2.0 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 6 nm |
| Shading Units | 2048+167% | 768 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 2.961 TFLOPS | 3.686 TFLOPS+24% |
| ROPs | 32 | 32 |
| TMUs | 128+167% | 48 |
| L1 Cache | 512 KB+100% | 256 KB |
| L2 Cache | 0.5 MB | 1 MB+100% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
A critical advantage for the Radeon RX 6300 is support for FSR 3 / AFMF. This allows it to generate entire frames using AI/Algorithms, essentially doubling the frame rate in CPU-bound scenarios or heavy ray-tracing titles. The Radeon R9 M295X lacks specific hardware/driver support for this native frame generation tier.
| Feature | Radeon R9 M295X | Radeon RX 6300 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 3 (Native) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | FSR 3 / AFMF (Driver) |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | AMD Anti-Lag | AMD Anti-Lag |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 4 GB of video memory. Memory bandwidth: 176 GB/s (Radeon R9 M295X) vs 64 GB/s (Radeon RX 6300) — a 175% advantage for the Radeon R9 M295X. Bus width: 256-bit vs 32-bit. L2 Cache: 0.5 MB (Radeon R9 M295X) vs 1 MB (Radeon RX 6300) — the Radeon RX 6300 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Radeon R9 M295X | Radeon RX 6300 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 176 GB/s+175% | 64 GB/s |
| Bus Width | 256-bit+700% | 32-bit |
| L2 Cache | 0.5 MB | 1 MB+100% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (Radeon R9 M295X) vs 12_2 (Radeon RX 6300). Maximum simultaneous displays: 0 vs 2.
| Feature | Radeon R9 M295X | Radeon RX 6300 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 | 12_2 |
| Max Displays | 0 | 2 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: VCE 3.0 (Radeon R9 M295X) vs VCN 3.0 (Radeon RX 6300). Decoder: UVD 4.2 vs VCN 3.0.
| Feature | Radeon R9 M295X | Radeon RX 6300 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | VCE 3.0 | VCN 3.0 |
| Decoder | UVD 4.2 | VCN 3.0 |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon R9 M295X draws 250W versus the Radeon RX 6300's 35W — a 150.9% difference. The Radeon RX 6300 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Radeon R9 M295X) vs 300W (Radeon RX 6300). Power connectors: Mobile vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 1mm vs 160mm, occupying 0 vs 1 slots.
| Feature | Radeon R9 M295X | Radeon RX 6300 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 250W | 35W-86% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 300W-14% |
| Power Connector | Mobile | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 1mm | 160mm |
| Slots | 0-100% | 1 |
| Perf/Watt | 20.6 | 152.0+638% |
Value Analysis
The Radeon R9 M295X launched at $300 MSRP and currently averages $150, while the Radeon RX 6300 launched at $60 and now averages $40. The Radeon RX 6300 costs 73.3% less ($110 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 34.3 (Radeon R9 M295X) vs 133.0 (Radeon RX 6300) — the Radeon RX 6300 offers 287.8% better value. The Radeon RX 6300 is the newer GPU (2022 vs 2014).
| Feature | Radeon R9 M295X | Radeon RX 6300 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $300 | $60-80% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $150 | $40-73% |
| Performance per Dollar | 34.3 | 133.0+288% |
| Codename | Amethyst | Navi 24 |
| Release | November 23 2014 | January 4 2022 |
| Ranking | #437 | #379 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Radeon R9 M295X and Radeon RX 6300
