
Radeon R9 M385 vs Quadro P520

Radeon R9 M385
Popular choices:

Quadro P520
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 M385 is positioned at rank 420 and the Quadro P520 is on rank 111, so the Quadro P520 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 M385
Performance Per Dollar Quadro P520
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The Quadro P520 uses modern memory architecture. The Quadro P520 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Radeon R9 M385 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Radeon R9 M385 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1.3% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Quadro P520.
| Insight | Radeon R9 M385 | Quadro P520 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+1.3%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.3%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / GCN 2.0 (2013−2017)) | Pascal (2016−2021) (14nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | — | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The Radeon R9 M385 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $60 versus $150 for the Quadro P520, it costs 60% less. While it maintains basic entry-level capabilities, this results in a 153.3% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Radeon R9 M385 | Quadro P520 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+153.3%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($60) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($150) |
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 M385 and Quadro P520

Radeon R9 M385
The Radeon R9 M385 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in May 5 2015. It features the GCN 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 900 MHz to 1100 MHz. It has 896 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 2,061 points.

Quadro P520
The Quadro P520 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in May 23 2019. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 1303 MHz to 1493 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 18W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 2,034 points.
Graphics Performance
The Radeon R9 M385 scores 2,061 and the Quadro P520 reaches 2,034 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.3% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon R9 M385 is built on GCN 2.0 while the Quadro P520 uses Pascal, both on 28 nm vs 14 nm. Shader units: 896 (Radeon R9 M385) vs 384 (Quadro P520). Raw compute: 1.792 TFLOPS (Radeon R9 M385) vs 1.147 TFLOPS (Quadro P520). Boost clocks: 1100 MHz vs 1493 MHz.
| Feature | Radeon R9 M385 | Quadro P520 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 2,061+1% | 2,034 |
| Architecture | GCN 2.0 | Pascal |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 14 nm |
| Shading Units | 896+133% | 384 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.792 TFLOPS+56% | 1.147 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 1100 MHz | 1493 MHz+36% |
| ROPs | 16 | 16 |
| TMUs | 56+133% | 24 |
| L1 Cache | 224 KB+56% | 144 KB |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 512 KB+100% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Radeon R9 M385 | Quadro P520 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 4 GB of GDDR5. Bus width: 128-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 256 KB (Radeon R9 M385) vs 512 KB (Quadro P520) — the Quadro P520 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Radeon R9 M385 | Quadro P520 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 128-bit+100% | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 512 KB+100% |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon R9 M385 draws 75W versus the Quadro P520's 18W — a 122.6% difference. The Quadro P520 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Radeon R9 M385) vs 350W (Quadro P520). Power connectors: Mobile vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | Radeon R9 M385 | Quadro P520 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W | 18W-76% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | Mobile | PCIe-powered |
| Perf/Watt | 27.5 | 113.0+311% |
Value Analysis
The Radeon R9 M385 launched at $300 MSRP and currently averages $60, while the Quadro P520 launched at $150 and now averages $150. The Radeon R9 M385 costs 60% less ($90 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 34.4 (Radeon R9 M385) vs 13.6 (Quadro P520) — the Radeon R9 M385 offers 152.9% better value. The Quadro P520 is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2015).
| Feature | Radeon R9 M385 | Quadro P520 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $300 | $150-50% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $60-60% | $150 |
| Performance per Dollar | 34.4+153% | 13.6 |
| Codename | Strato | GP108 |
| Release | May 5 2015 | May 23 2019 |
| Ranking | #674 | #677 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.















