M395X vs M295X benchmarks

mattoligy

macrumors 6502
Original poster
May 15, 2010
396
191
Cloud 9
Ok I have been searching Macrumors and Google for well over an hour now and my head is spinning. So in fear I will be told off for starting another thread of this nature, I really hope there is someone that can shed some light on this...

Is the R395X a genuine upgrade to its predecessor because from what I am reading (from limited information) the new chip is in fact the exact same GPU as last years R295X in the form of a "rebrand". If this is the case I don't feel happy to pull the trigger on a top of the line iMac let alone pay hundreds more for the step up in GPUs. Last years tech, really?

Is there a change in architecture? A higher clock speed? Does anyone have benchmarks comparing the two?

Thanks
 

aidler

macrumors regular
Jun 18, 2009
127
148
Ok I have been searching Macrumors and Google for well over an hour now and my head is spinning. So in fear I will be told off for starting another thread of this nature, I really hope there is someone that can shed some light on this...

Is the R395X a genuine upgrade to its predecessor because from what I am reading (from limited information) the new chip is in fact the exact same GPU as last years R295X in the form of a "rebrand". If this is the case I don't feel happy to pull the trigger on a top of the line iMac let alone pay hundreds more for the step up in GPUs. Last years tech, really?

Is there a change in architecture? A higher clock speed? Does anyone have benchmarks comparing the two?

Thanks
 

Nirurin

macrumors member
Oct 3, 2013
85
12

Ignore this, cos it's not actually right. It's the 'offical' specs maybe, but the clock speed is wrong for sure. The 395 is set to around 850 I think and the 395x is set to... 907? I'll try and find the right numbers in a minute and post again.

edit:

m395 = 1792 shaders, 834mhz, 2gb DDr5

m395x = 2048 shaders, 909mhz, 4gb DDr5
 
  • Like
Reactions: mattoligy

joema2

macrumors 68000
Sep 3, 2013
1,591
797
Ignore this, cos it's not actually right. It's the 'offical' specs maybe, but the clock speed is wrong for sure...
As you said the numbers are wrong. This is obvious from the 250W TDP figure. A $2,100 10-core Intel Xeon E5-2687W v3 has a TDP of 160 watts. Such CPUs require a multi-fan air cooler the size of a large grapefruit or liquid cooling. How could a mobile-class air-cooled GPU inside a thin iMac have a TDP twice that of a high-end Xeon? Since the writer of that table did not even sanity check obvious things like this, I wouldn't trust the other numbers either.
 

OSB

macrumors member
Oct 27, 2015
30
8
http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/compare.php?cmp[]=2985&cmp[]=3340

You can also check out the nifty bar chart here:
http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/high_end_gpus.html

The benchmarks - albeit early and run in Windows, place the M395x about ~16% faster than the M295X. Actual FPS comparisons I've seen around the web, including on this site, are about consistent with how I'd expect a theoretical 16% to translate IRL -- that is, about 4-6 FPS from game settings that got ~60FPS under the M295x.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mattoligy
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.