
Radeon R9 M385X
Popular choices:

FirePro V7800
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 M385X is positioned at rank 429 and the FirePro V7800 is on rank 257, so the FirePro V7800 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 M385X
Performance Per Dollar FirePro V7800
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The FirePro V7800 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1.7% higher G3D Mark score and 700% more VRAM (4 GB vs 512 MB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Radeon R9 M385X.
| Insight | Radeon R9 M385X | FirePro V7800 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.7%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+1.7%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / GCN 2.0 (2013−2017)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2011 / TeraScale 3 (2010−2013)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+700%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | — | Standard Size (254mm) |
💎 Value Proposition
The FirePro V7800 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the FirePro V7800 holds the technical lead. Priced at $96 (vs $300), it costs 68% less, resulting in a 217.8% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Radeon R9 M385X | FirePro V7800 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+217.8%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($300) | ✅More affordable ($96) |
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 M385X and FirePro V7800

Radeon R9 M385X
The Radeon R9 M385X is manufactured by AMD. It was released in May 5 2015. It features the GCN 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1000 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: 1,994 points.

FirePro V7800
The FirePro V7800 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in May 24 2011. It features the TeraScale 3 architecture. The core clock speed is 725 MHz. It has 1280 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 150W. Manufactured using 40 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 2,028 points.
Graphics Performance
The Radeon R9 M385X scores 1,994 and the FirePro V7800 reaches 2,028 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.7% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon R9 M385X is built on GCN 2.0 while the FirePro V7800 uses TeraScale 3, both on 28 nm vs 40 nm. Shader units: 896 (Radeon R9 M385X) vs 1,280 (FirePro V7800). Raw compute: 1.971 TFLOPS (Radeon R9 M385X) vs 1.856 TFLOPS (FirePro V7800).
| Feature | Radeon R9 M385X | FirePro V7800 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 1,994 | 2,028+2% |
| Architecture | GCN 2.0 | TeraScale 3 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 40 nm |
| Shading Units | 896 | 1280+43% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.971 TFLOPS+6% | 1.856 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 16 | 32+100% |
| TMUs | 56 | 80+43% |
| L1 Cache | 224 KB | 320 KB+43% |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 512 KB+100% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Radeon R9 M385X | FirePro V7800 |
|---|---|---|
| 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)
The Radeon R9 M385X comes with 512 MB of VRAM, while the FirePro V7800 has 4 GB. The FirePro V7800 offers 700% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 256 KB (Radeon R9 M385X) vs 512 KB (FirePro V7800) — the FirePro V7800 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Radeon R9 M385X | FirePro V7800 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB | 4 GB+700% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 128-bit+100% | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 512 KB+100% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (12_0) (Radeon R9 M385X) vs 11.2 (FirePro V7800). Vulkan: 1.2 vs None. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.4. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 3.
| Feature | Radeon R9 M385X | FirePro V7800 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 (12_0)+7% | 11.2 |
| Vulkan | 1.2 | None |
| OpenGL | 4.6+5% | 4.4 |
| Max Displays | 4+33% | 3 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: VCE 2.0 (Radeon R9 M385X) vs None (FirePro V7800). Decoder: UVD 4.2 vs UVD 2.3. Supported codecs: H.264,MPEG-4,VC-1,MPEG-2 (Radeon R9 M385X) vs H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 (FirePro V7800).
| Feature | Radeon R9 M385X | FirePro V7800 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | VCE 2.0 | None |
| Decoder | UVD 4.2 | UVD 2.3 |
| Codecs | H.264,MPEG-4,VC-1,MPEG-2 | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon R9 M385X draws 75W versus the FirePro V7800's 150W — a 66.7% difference. The Radeon R9 M385X is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Radeon R9 M385X) vs 350W (FirePro V7800). Power connectors: Mobile vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 0mm vs 254mm, occupying 0 vs 1 slots. Typical load temperature: 85 vs 85°C.
| Feature | Radeon R9 M385X | FirePro V7800 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W-50% | 150W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | Mobile | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 0mm | 254mm |
| Height | 0mm | 111mm |
| Slots | 0-100% | 1 |
| Temp (Load) | 85 | 85°C |
| Perf/Watt | 26.6+97% | 13.5 |
Value Analysis
The Radeon R9 M385X launched at $300 MSRP and currently averages $300, while the FirePro V7800 launched at $759 and now averages $96. The FirePro V7800 costs 68% less ($204 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 6.6 (Radeon R9 M385X) vs 21.1 (FirePro V7800) — the FirePro V7800 offers 219.7% better value. The Radeon R9 M385X is the newer GPU (2015 vs 2011).
| Feature | Radeon R9 M385X | FirePro V7800 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $300-60% | $759 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $300 | $96-68% |
| Performance per Dollar | 6.6 | 21.1+220% |
| Codename | Strato | Cayman |
| Release | May 5 2015 | May 24 2011 |
| Ranking | #681 | #656 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.

















