OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Graphics cards Methodology v1.0
Graphics cards Methodology v1.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Graphics cards Methodology v1.0: technical specifications plus authentic consumer ratings, with 0% commercial bias.
Explore Graphics cards Methodology v1.0

AMD Radeon R9 380 Review | 118 Data compared

Avg. price:~ÂŁ55VRAM:2 GBMemory bus width:256 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):190 W

AMD Radeon R9 380 Review: Compare 118 technical specifications and user reviews to see how this product ranks in the Graphics cards category and whether it is worth buying.

AMD Radeon R9 380
4.5/10

Overall score

Score
4.5/ 10
âś•
What it is
An overall evaluation of the graphics card's quality, based on technical analyses and user reviews.
When it matters
When you need a quick reference to identify the best graphics cards on the market.
Score distribution
â–Ľ
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–Ľ Worse than 92% of models
Score components

90%

4.1

Technical score

10%

8.3

User score

â–ĽWorse than 92% of graphics cards
6.1

Value for money

Value for money
6.1/ 10
âś•
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
â–Ľ
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–Ľ Worse than 89% of models
Score components

70%

4.5

Overall score

30%

10

Price

â–ĽWorse than 89%
4.1

Technical score

Technical score
4.1/ 10
âś•
What it is
An assessment of technical performance for products in the Graphics cards category across these key areas: Performance, Memory, Platform & Features, Connectivity & Media, Power & Cooling, Design.
When it matters
When you want to compare graphics cards based on technical performance and available features.
Score distribution
â–Ľ
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–Ľ Worse than 93% of models
Score components

44%

2.1

Performance

24%

3.1

Memory

12%

8.6

Power & Cooling

11%

6.3

Platform & Features

5%

10

Design

4%

5.2

Connectivity & Media

â–ĽWorse than 93%
8.3

User score

User score
8.3/ 10
âś•
What it is
A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the graphics card.
When it matters
When you want to understand how a graphics card performs in real use and how reliable it is in terms of performance, temperatures, noise, stability, and long-term ownership.
Score distribution
â–Ľ
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–˛ Better than 66% of models
Score components

70%

8.2

User ratings

30%

8.5

Number of reviews

Based on ratings from across the web.
â–˛Better than 66%
  • amd-radeon-r9-380
amd-radeon-r9-380
Best prices
*As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of graphics card AMD Radeon R9 380

Technical score
Technical score
4.1/ 10
âś•
What it is
An assessment of technical performance for products in the Graphics cards category across these key areas: Performance, Memory, Platform & Features, Connectivity & Media, Power & Cooling, Design.
When it matters
When you want to compare graphics cards based on technical performance and available features.
Score distribution
â–Ľ
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–Ľ Worse than 93% of models
Score components:

44%

2.1

Performance

24%

3.1

Memory

12%

8.6

Power & Cooling

11%

6.3

Platform & Features

5%

10

Design

4%

5.2

Connectivity & Media

4.1
User score
User score
8.3/ 10
âś•
What it is
A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the graphics card.
When it matters
When you want to understand how a graphics card performs in real use and how reliable it is in terms of performance, temperatures, noise, stability, and long-term ownership.
Score distribution
â–Ľ
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–˛ Better than 66% of models
Score components

70%

8.2

User ratings

30%

8.5

Number of reviews

Based on ratings from across the web.
8.3
Popularity
Popularity
8.5/ 10
âś•
What it is
An indicator based on the number of reviews received by the graphics card.
When it matters
When you prefer a graphics card that has already been chosen and reviewed by many other users.
Score distribution
â–Ľ
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–˛ Better than 79% of models
Popularity:
AMD Radeon R9 380 has a popularity score of 8.5 points, which is higher than that of 78.9% of products in this category.
8.5
Value for money
Value for money
6.1/ 10
âś•
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
â–Ľ
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–Ľ Worse than 89% of models
Score components:

70%

4.5

Overall score

30%

10

Price

6.1
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
2,800 points
Market range: <4k points – >34k points
This graphics card scores 2,800 points in 3DMark Time Spy, which is lower than 93.2% of graphics cards.
3DMark Port Royal score
0 points
Market range: <0 points – >25k points
This graphics card scores 0 points in 3DMark Port Royal, which is lower than 83.2% of graphics cards and equal to 16.8% of graphics cards.
PassMark (G3D) result
6,000 points
Market range: <7.7k points – >36k points
This graphics card scores 6,000 points in PassMark G3D, which is lower than 92.3% of graphics cards and equal to 0.1% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
2,457 points
Market range: <3.1k points – >26.3k points
This graphics card scores 2,457 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is lower than 93.7% of graphics cards.
Floating-point performance
3.48 TFLOPS
Market range: <4.38 TFLOPS – >57.42 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 3.48 TFLOPS floating-point performance, which is lower than that of 91.7% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.1% of graphics cards.
Show more
VRAM
2 GB
Market range: <4 GB – >24 GB
This graphics card has 2 GB of VRAM, which is less than 94.5% of graphics cards and equal to 3.8% of graphics cards.
Memory type
GDDR5
GDDR version
GDDR5
This graphics card uses GDDR5 memory, which is older than on 85.9% of graphics cards and equal to 13.2% of graphics cards.
Memory bus width
256 bit
Market range: <64 bit – >384 bit
This graphics card uses a 256 bit memory bus, which is wider than that of 49.7% of graphics cards and equal to that of 35.9% of graphics cards.
Maximum memory bandwidth
176 GB/s
Market range: <168 GB/s – >960 GB/s
This graphics card reaches 176 GB/s memory bandwidth, which is lower than that of 89.7% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.1% of graphics cards.
Show more
PCI Express (PCIe) version
3
This graphics card supports PCIe 3, which is older than on 77.7% of graphics cards and equal to 20.3% of graphics cards.
PCIe lanes
x16
This graphics card uses x16 PCIe lanes, which is more than 23.4% of graphics cards and equal to 76.6% of graphics cards.
DirectX version
12
This graphics card supports DirectX 12, which is older than on 81.8% of graphics cards and equal to 16.9% of graphics cards.
Vulkan version
1.2
This graphics card supports Vulkan 1.2, which is older than on 95.1% of graphics cards and equal to 3.7% of graphics cards.
OpenGL version
4.6
This graphics card supports OpenGL 4.6, which is more advanced than on 1.9% of graphics cards and equal to 98.1% of graphics cards.
Show more
Max displays supported
3
Market range: <4 – >4
This graphics card supports up to 3 displays, which is fewer than 91.8% of graphics cards and equal to 5.9% of graphics cards.
Max digital resolution
4096x2160
This graphics card supports a maximum digital resolution of 4096x2160, which is lower than that of 92.6% of graphics cards and equal to that of 4.4% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort outputs
1
Market range: <1 – >3
This graphics card offers 1 DisplayPort outputs, which is fewer than 88.7% of graphics cards and equal to 8.6% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort version
1.2
This graphics card supports DisplayPort 1.2, which is older than on 93.9% of graphics cards and equal to 5.1% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort link rates
5.4 Gbps
Market range: <5.4 Gbps – >80 Gbps
This graphics card supports DisplayPort link rates up to 5.4 Gbps, which is slower than on 87.8% of graphics cards and equal to 6% of graphics cards.
Show more
Thermal Design Power (TDP)
190 W
Market range: <60 W – >360 W
This graphics card has a TDP of 190 W, which is lower than that of 55.4% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.8% of graphics cards.
Power consumption while under peak load
190 W
Market range: <100 W – >400 W
This graphics card draws 190 W under peak load, which is lower than 58.3% of graphics cards and equal to 0.8% of graphics cards.
Recommended PSU wattage
500 W
Market range: <450 W – >850 W
This graphics card recommends a 500 W PSU, which is lower than that of 75.6% of graphics cards and equal to that of 8.9% of graphics cards.
Board power limit
190 W
Market range: <100 W – >400 W
This graphics card has a board power limit of 190 W, which is lower than that of 59% of graphics cards and equal to that of 1% of graphics cards.
PCIe power spec
190 W
Show more
Size
221x 111x 38 mm
Length
221 mm
Market range: <200 mm – >350 mm
This graphics card is 221 mm long, which is shorter than 85.4% of graphics cards and equal in length to 0.2% of graphics cards.
Height
111 mm
Market range: <109 mm – >146 mm
This graphics card is 111 mm tall, which is shorter than 83.5% of graphics cards and equal in height to 5.1% of graphics cards.
Slot width
2 slot/s
Market range: <2 slot/s – >3.25 slot/s
This graphics card occupies 2 slot/s, which is slimmer than 53.4% of graphics cards and equal in width to 42.5% of graphics cards.
Weight
943 g
Market range: <500 g – >2k g
This graphics card weighs 943 g, which is lighter than 60.4% of graphics cards.
Show more

AMD Radeon R9 380 vs the average graphics card

246810TotalPerformanceMemoryPlatform & FeaturesConnectivity & MediaPower & CoolingDesign
  • 64 mm shorter card length
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (221 mm vs 285 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 285 mm.
    221 mm vs 285 mm
  • 23.1% lower PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a lower PSU requirement than the average graphics card (500 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    500 W vs 650 W
  • 14 mm lower card height
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (111 mm vs 125 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 125 mm.
    111 mm vs 125 mm
  • 0.5 slot/s slimmer design
    This graphics card occupies fewer slots than the average graphics card (2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s). The average graphics card occupies 2.5 slot/s.
    2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s
  • 2 more DVI outputs
    This graphics card has more DVI outputs than the average graphics card (2 vs 0). The average graphics card has 0 DVI outputs.
    2 vs 0
  • 2 more GPUs supported
    This graphics card supports more GPUs in multi-GPU mode than the average graphics card (2 vs 0). The average graphics card supports 0 GPUs in multi-GPU mode.
    2 vs 0
  • 9.64x cheaper
    AMD Radeon R9 380 is cheaper than the average graphics card (ÂŁ55 vs ÂŁ530).
    ÂŁ55 vs ÂŁ530
  • Supports multi-GPU linking
    This graphics card supports multi-GPU linking, the average graphics card does not.
  • 9.64x cheaper
    AMD Radeon R9 380 is cheaper than the average graphics card (ÂŁ55 vs ÂŁ530).
    ÂŁ55 vs ÂŁ530
  • 3.7% higher user score
    User score
    8.3/ 10
    âś•
    What it is
    A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the graphics card.
    When it matters
    When you want to understand how a graphics card performs in real use and how reliable it is in terms of performance, temperatures, noise, stability, and long-term ownership.
    Score distribution
    â–Ľ
    â–Ľ
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    AMD Radeon R9 380
    the average graphics card
    AMD Radeon R9 380 has a higher user score than the average graphics card (8.29 vs 8.000).
    8.29 vs 8
  • Better FP64 ratio
    This graphics card has a better FP64 ratio than the average graphics card (1:16 vs 1:64).
    1:16 vs 1:64
  • 2 more GPUs supported
    This graphics card supports more GPUs in multi-GPU mode than the average graphics card (2 vs 0). The average graphics card supports 0 GPUs in multi-GPU mode.
    2 vs 0
  • Supports multi-GPU linking
    This graphics card supports multi-GPU linking, the average graphics card does not.
  • 2 more DVI outputs
    This graphics card has more DVI outputs than the average graphics card (2 vs 0). The average graphics card has 0 DVI outputs.
    2 vs 0
  • 23.1% lower PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a lower PSU requirement than the average graphics card (500 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    500 W vs 650 W
  • 64 mm shorter card length
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (221 mm vs 285 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 285 mm.
    221 mm vs 285 mm
  • 14 mm lower card height
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (111 mm vs 125 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 125 mm.
    111 mm vs 125 mm
  • 0.5 slot/s slimmer design
    This graphics card occupies fewer slots than the average graphics card (2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s). The average graphics card occupies 2.5 slot/s.
    2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s
  • 60.1% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1000 MHz vs 2505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2505 MHz.
    1,000 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 10 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (2 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    2 GB vs 12 GB
  • 5.6x larger process node
    This graphics card has a higher process node than the average graphics card (28 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a process node of 5 nm.
    28 nm vs 5 nm
  • 40 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    0 vs 40
  • 49.5% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (970 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    970 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • No CUDA support
    This graphics card does not support CUDA, the average graphics card does.
  • 71.5% lower texture rate
    This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (108.6 GTexel/s vs 381.2 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 381.2 GTexel/s.
    108.6 GTexel/s vs 381.2 GTexel/s
  • 1 fewer fans
    This graphics card has fewer fans than the average graphics card (2 vs 3).
    2 vs 3
  • 17% worse value for money
    AMD Radeon R9 380 has worse value for money than the average graphics card (6.15 vs 7.2).
    6.15 vs 7.2
  • 60.1% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1000 MHz vs 2505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2505 MHz.
    1,000 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 40 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    0 vs 40
  • 49.5% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (970 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    970 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • No CUDA support
    This graphics card does not support CUDA, the average graphics card does.
  • 71.5% lower texture rate
    This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (108.6 GTexel/s vs 381.2 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 381.2 GTexel/s.
    108.6 GTexel/s vs 381.2 GTexel/s
  • 81% lower pixel rate
    This graphics card has a lower pixel rate than the average graphics card (31 GPixel/s vs 163.2 GPixel/s). The average graphics card has a pixel rate of 163.2 GPixel/s.
    31.04 GPixel/s vs 163.2 GPixel/s
  • 12 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (28 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    28 vs 40
  • 72 fewer TMUs
    This graphics card has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (112 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    112 vs 184
  • 144 fewer AI cores
    This graphics card has fewer AI cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 144). The average graphics card has 144 AI cores.
    0 vs 144
  • 32 fewer ROPs
    This graphics card has fewer ROPs than the average graphics card (32 vs 64). The average graphics card has 64 ROPs.
    32 vs 64
  • 84.6% lower FP32 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP32 performance than the average graphics card (3.5 TFLOPS vs 22.57 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.57 TFLOPS.
    3.48 TFLOPS vs 22.57 TFLOPS
  • 73.5% lower PassMark score
    This graphics card has a lower PassMark score than the average graphics card (6000 points vs 22653 points). The average graphics card has a PassMark score of 22653 points.
    6,000 points vs 22,653 points
  • 80.9% lower gaming score
    This graphics card has a lower gaming score than the average graphics card (2800 points vs 14678.5 points). The average graphics card has a gaming score of 14678.5 points.
    2,800 points vs 14,678.5 points
  • 79.7% lower compute score
    This graphics card has a lower compute score than the average graphics card (2457 points vs 12074 points). The average graphics card has a compute score of 12074 points.
    2,457 points vs 12,074 points
  • 88.3% lower FP16 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP16 performance than the average graphics card (3.5 TFLOPS vs 29.7 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP16 performance of 29.725 TFLOPS.
    3.48 TFLOPS vs 29.725 TFLOPS
  • 84.9% lower compute throughput
    This graphics card has a lower compute throughput than the average graphics card (3.5 TFLOPS vs 22.98 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has compute throughput of 22.98 TFLOPS.
    3.48 TFLOPS vs 22.98 TFLOPS
  • 2,560 fewer FP32 units
    This graphics card has fewer FP32 units than the average graphics card (1,792 vs 4,352). The average graphics card has 4,352 FP32 units.
    1,792 vs 4,352
  • 54.2% lower FP64 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP64 performance than the average graphics card (0.2 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP64 performance of 0.48 TFLOPS.
    0.22 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS
  • 10 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (2 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    2 GB vs 12 GB
  • 71.1% slower memory speed
    This graphics card has a lower effective memory speed than the average graphics card (5500 MHz vs 19000 MHz). The average graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 19000 MHz.
    5,500 MHz vs 19,000 MHz
  • 60.7% lower memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (176 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    176 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • 21.4% slower VRAM clock
    This graphics card has a lower VRAM clock than the average graphics card (1375 MHz vs 1750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1750 MHz.
    1,375 MHz vs 1,750 MHz
  • 87.5% smaller L1 cache
    This graphics card has fewer L1 cache than the average graphics card (16 vs 128). The average graphics card has 128 L1 cache.
    16 vs 128
  • 5.6x larger process node
    This graphics card has a higher process node than the average graphics card (28 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a process node of 5 nm.
    28 nm vs 5 nm
  • No DLSS support
    This graphics card does not support DLSS, the average graphics card does.
  • No ray tracing
    This graphics card does not support ray tracing, the average graphics card does.
  • 8 older
    This graphics card was released earlier than the average graphics card (2015 vs 2023).
    June 2015
    2,015 vs 2,023
  • Older PCIe version
    This graphics card supports an older PCIe version than the average graphics card (3 vs 4).
    3.0 vs 4.0
  • No AI upscalers
    This graphics card does not support AI upscalers, the average graphics card does.
  • No mesh shaders
    This graphics card does not support mesh shaders, the average graphics card does.
  • No XeSS support
    This graphics card does not support XeSS, the average graphics card does.
  • Older encoder generation
    This graphics card uses an older encoder generation than the average graphics card (3 vs 8). The average graphics card uses encoder generation 8.
    3 vs 8
  • No DirectStorage support
    This graphics card does not support DirectStorage, the average graphics card does.
  • Older Vulkan version
    This graphics card supports an older Vulkan version than the average graphics card (1.2 vs 1.4).
    1.2 vs 1.4
  • Worse SAM support
    This graphics card offers worse SAM support than the average graphics card (no vs yes).
  • Older DirectX version
    This graphics card supports an older DirectX version than the average graphics card (12 vs 12 Ultimate).
    12 vs 12 Ultimate
  • Older OpenCL version
    This graphics card supports an older OpenCL version than the average graphics card (2.1 vs 3).
    2.1 vs 3.0
  • Older shader model
    This graphics card supports an older shader model than the average graphics card (6.5 vs 6.8).
    6.5 vs 6.8
  • No sampler feedback
    This graphics card does not support sampler feedback, the average graphics card does.
  • 78.2% fewer transistors
    This graphics card has fewer transistors than the average graphics card (5000 million vs 22900 million). The average graphics card has 22900 million transistors.
    5,000 million vs 22,900 million
  • Older FSR version
    This graphics card supports an older FSR version than the average graphics card (1 vs 3.1).
    1.0 vs 3.1
  • 2 fewer DisplayPort outputs
    This graphics card has fewer DisplayPort outputs than the average graphics card (1 vs 3). The average graphics card has 3 DisplayPort outputs.
    1 vs 3
  • No AV1 encoding
    This graphics card does not support AV1 encoding, the average graphics card does.
  • 1 fewer displays supported
    This graphics card supports fewer displays than the average graphics card (3 vs 4). The average graphics card supports 4 displays.
    3 vs 4
  • No AV1 decoding
    This graphics card does not support AV1 decoding, the average graphics card does.
  • No DSC support
    This graphics card does not support DSC, the average graphics card does.
  • Older HDMI version
    This graphics card supports an older HDMI version than the average graphics card (1.4a vs 2.1).
    1.4a vs 2.1
  • Older DisplayPort version
    This graphics card supports an older DisplayPort version than the average graphics card (1.2 vs 1.4a).
    1.2 vs 1.4a
  • Narrower encode codec support
    This graphics card supports narrower hardware encode codec support than the average graphics card (H.264/H.265 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9).
    H.264/H.265 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9
  • Narrower decode codec support
    This graphics card supports narrower hardware decode codec support than the average graphics card (H.264/MPEG-2/VC-1 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9/MPEG-2/VC-1).
    H.264/MPEG-2/VC-1 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9/MPEG-2/VC-1
  • Older HDCP version
    This graphics card supports an older HDCP version than the average graphics card (1.4 vs 2.3).
    1.4 vs 2.3
  • Lower display resolution
    This graphics card supports a lower maximum digital resolution than the average graphics card (4096x2160 vs 7680x4320). The average graphics card supports a maximum digital resolution of 7680x4320.
    4096x2160 vs 7680x4320
  • 2 fewer monitors per output type
    This graphics card supports fewer monitors per output type than the average graphics card (1 vs 3). The average graphics card supports 3 monitors per output type.
    1 vs 3
  • 73% lower DisplayPort bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower DisplayPort bandwidth than the average graphics card (5.4 Gbps vs 20 Gbps). The average graphics card has DisplayPort bandwidth of 20 Gbps.
    5.4 Gbps vs 20 Gbps
  • 1 fewer fans
    This graphics card has fewer fans than the average graphics card (2 vs 3).
    2 vs 3
  • 8 °C higher load temperature
    This graphics card has a higher load temperature than the average graphics card (75 °C vs 67 °C). The average graphics card has a load temperature of 67 °C.
    75 °C vs 67 °C
  • 6 °C higher idle temperature
    This graphics card has a higher idle temperature than the average graphics card (43 °C vs 37 °C). The average graphics card has an idle temperature of 37 °C.
    43 °C vs 37 °C

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

G
guru3d.com
20/10/2015
Summary of the review
MSI Radeon R9 380 Gaming 2G review Digital Foundry
N
nikktech.com
24/09/2015
Summary of the review
MSI Radeon R9 380 Gaming 2G Review
G
gamersnexus.net
18/06/2015
Summary of the review
Sapphire AMD R9 390Go to product viewer dialog for this item. & R9 380 Review and Benchmark
T
techgage.com
31/08/2015
Summary of the review
PowerColor Radeon R9 380 PCS+ Graphics Card Review
T
trustedreviews.com
24/08/2015
Summary of the review
AMD Radeon R9 380 Review
N
nikktech.com
24/09/2015
Summary of the review
MSI Radeon R9 380 Gaming 2G Review
C
computerbase.de
18/06/2015
Summary of the review
AMD Radeon R9 390XGo to product viewer dialog for this item., 390, 380 und R7 370 im Test
(Translated)Show original
C
cowcotland.com
02/11/2015
Summary of the review
Carte graphique VTX 3D R9 380 : Introduction
(Translated)Show original
H
hardware.fr
02/12/2015
Summary of the review
Comparatif express de 6 Radeon R9 380(comptoir-hardware.com) | 18 juin 2015 | Test • AMD Radeon R9 380 & R7 370Go to product viewer dialog for this it...
(Translated)Show original
T
tomshw.it
21/06/2015
Summary of the review
Recensione Radeon R9 390X, R9 380 e R7 370, test prestazioni e consumi
(Translated)Show original
T
tweakers.net
25/09/2021
Summary of the review
Overleef de videokaartenschaarste - 26 oudere gpu's getest in moderne games
(Translated)Show original

Third-party reviews

Based on ratings from across the web.
Reviews last updated: June 2026 · How we calculate this

What we like about AMD Radeon R9 380

  • Strong 1080p performance, often outperforming the Nvidia GTX 960 in benchmarks
  • Capable of entry-level 1440p gaming with adjusted settings
  • Excellent value for money at its original and current used price points
  • Third-party models (like MSI Gaming or Sapphire Nitro) offer quiet operation and effective cooling
  • Supports modern APIs like DirectX 12 and features like AMD FreeSync

What we don't like about AMD Radeon R9 380

  • High power consumption compared to competitors, with a TDP around 190W
  • 2GB VRAM version is severely limited for modern titles, leading to stuttering
  • Driver support for this architecture was discontinued by AMD in 2022
  • Limited overclocking headroom due to its older 'Tonga/Antigua' architecture
  • Reference models are known to run significantly hotter and louder than partner cards

Verdict

The AMD Radeon R9 380, launched in June 2015, is a mid-range graphics card based on the 28nm 'Antigua' graphics processor and GCN 1.2 architecture. It features 1,792 stream processors, 112 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs, with a core clock of 970 MHz. The card was produced in 2GB and 4GB GDDR5 variants using a 256-bit memory interface, delivering a bandwidth of approximately 176 GB/s. Main pros include solid 1080p gaming performance, support for DirectX 12, and a competitive price point at launch that rivaled the NVIDIA GTX 960. However, cons include high power consumption with a 190W TDP requiring dual 6-pin connectors, limited VRAM for modern AAA titles (especially in 2GB models), and the fact that AMD ended official driver support for this architecture in 2021.

Compare AMD Radeon R9 380 with other products in the Graphics cards category

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of AMD Radeon R9 380 and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found