
Radeon PRO W6400
Popular choices:

Radeon R9 390
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.
Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook
This comparison brings together gaming FPS, raw graphics performance, VRAM, feature set, power efficiency, pricing context, and long-term value so you can see which GPU actually makes more sense.
Radeon PRO W6400
2022Why buy it
- ✅Costs $100 less on MSRP ($229 MSRP vs $329 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 36.7% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 36.8 vs 26.9 G3D/$ ($229 MSRP vs $329 MSRP).
- ✅More future proof: RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025) on 6nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
- ✅Draws 50W instead of 300W, a 250W reduction.
- ✅Measures 168mm instead of 275mm, a 107mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.
Trade-offs
- ❌Less VRAM, with 4 GB vs 8 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
Radeon R9 390
2015Why buy it
- ✅100% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (8 GB vs 4 GB).
Trade-offs
- ❌Poor future-proofing: 2015-era hardware with 8 GB of VRAM is already a legacy-tier option for modern games.
- ❌43.7% HIGHER MSRP$329 MSRPvs$229 MSRP
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 26.9 vs 36.8 G3D/$ ($329 MSRP vs $229 MSRP).
- ❌500% higher power demand at 300W vs 50W.
- ❌63.7% longer card at 275mm vs 168mm.
Radeon PRO W6400
2022Radeon R9 390
2015Why buy it
- ✅Costs $100 less on MSRP ($229 MSRP vs $329 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 36.7% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 36.8 vs 26.9 G3D/$ ($229 MSRP vs $329 MSRP).
- ✅More future proof: RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025) on 6nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
- ✅Draws 50W instead of 300W, a 250W reduction.
- ✅Measures 168mm instead of 275mm, a 107mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.
Why buy it
- ✅100% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (8 GB vs 4 GB).
Trade-offs
- ❌Less VRAM, with 4 GB vs 8 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
Trade-offs
- ❌Poor future-proofing: 2015-era hardware with 8 GB of VRAM is already a legacy-tier option for modern games.
- ❌43.7% HIGHER MSRP$329 MSRPvs$229 MSRP
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 26.9 vs 36.8 G3D/$ ($329 MSRP vs $229 MSRP).
- ❌500% higher power demand at 300W vs 50W.
- ❌63.7% longer card at 275mm vs 168mm.
Quick Answers
So, is Radeon R9 390 better than Radeon PRO W6400?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper card?
When does Radeon PRO W6400 make more sense than Radeon R9 390?
Games Benchmarks
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 9800X3D 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.

Path of Exile 2
| Preset | Radeon PRO W6400 | Radeon R9 390 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 132 FPS | 135 FPS |
| medium | 118 FPS | 115 FPS |
| high | 101 FPS | 94 FPS |
| ultra | 75 FPS | 57 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 118 FPS | 113 FPS |
| medium | 100 FPS | 96 FPS |
| high | 83 FPS | 70 FPS |
| ultra | 62 FPS | 42 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 49 FPS | 39 FPS |
| medium | 46 FPS | 36 FPS |
| high | 34 FPS | 22 FPS |
| ultra | 30 FPS | 19 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Radeon PRO W6400 | Radeon R9 390 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 169 FPS | 198 FPS |
| medium | 134 FPS | 173 FPS |
| high | 99 FPS | 143 FPS |
| ultra | 66 FPS | 111 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 110 FPS | 138 FPS |
| medium | 86 FPS | 110 FPS |
| high | 64 FPS | 88 FPS |
| ultra | 46 FPS | 67 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 57 FPS | 61 FPS |
| medium | 44 FPS | 50 FPS |
| high | 35 FPS | 45 FPS |
| ultra | 22 FPS | 36 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Radeon PRO W6400 | Radeon R9 390 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 377 FPS | 398 FPS |
| medium | 303 FPS | 319 FPS |
| high | 249 FPS | 266 FPS |
| ultra | 190 FPS | 199 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 265 FPS | 299 FPS |
| medium | 228 FPS | 239 FPS |
| high | 186 FPS | 199 FPS |
| ultra | 142 FPS | 149 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 155 FPS | 199 FPS |
| medium | 143 FPS | 159 FPS |
| high | 102 FPS | 133 FPS |
| ultra | 70 FPS | 100 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Radeon PRO W6400 | Radeon R9 390 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 285 FPS | 224 FPS |
| medium | 206 FPS | 193 FPS |
| high | 180 FPS | 156 FPS |
| ultra | 146 FPS | 132 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 210 FPS | 170 FPS |
| medium | 149 FPS | 146 FPS |
| high | 132 FPS | 113 FPS |
| ultra | 104 FPS | 92 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 105 FPS | 95 FPS |
| medium | 76 FPS | 75 FPS |
| high | 67 FPS | 59 FPS |
| ultra | 51 FPS | 45 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Radeon PRO W6400 and Radeon R9 390

Radeon PRO W6400
Radeon PRO W6400
The Radeon PRO W6400 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in January 19 2022. It features the RDNA 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 2331 MHz to 2331 MHz. It has 768 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 6 nm process technology. It features 12 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 8,428 points.

Radeon R9 390
Radeon R9 390
The Radeon R9 390 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in June 18 2015. It features the GCN 2.0 architecture. The boost clock speed is 1000 MHz. It has 2560 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 300W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 8,855 points. Launch price was $329.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the Radeon PRO W6400 scores 8,428 versus the Radeon R9 390's 8,855 — the Radeon R9 390 leads by 5.1%. The Radeon PRO W6400 is built on RDNA 2.0 while the Radeon R9 390 uses GCN 2.0, both on 6 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 768 (Radeon PRO W6400) vs 2,560 (Radeon R9 390). Raw compute: 3.58 TFLOPS (Radeon PRO W6400) vs 5.12 TFLOPS (Radeon R9 390). Boost clocks: 2331 MHz vs 1000 MHz.
| Feature | Radeon PRO W6400 | Radeon R9 390 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 8,428 | 8,855+5% |
| Architecture | RDNA 2.0 | GCN 2.0 |
| Process Node | 6 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 768 | 2560+233% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 3.58 TFLOPS | 5.12 TFLOPS+43% |
| Boost Clock | 2331 MHz+133% | 1000 MHz |
| ROPs | 32 | 64+100% |
| TMUs | 48 | 160+233% |
| L1 Cache | 256 KB | 640 KB+150% |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 1 MB |
| Frame Generation | FSR upscaling + RSR | FSR upscaling |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Radeon PRO W6400 | Radeon R9 390 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR Upscaling / FSR 4 | FSR Upscaling / FSR 4 |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | AMD Anti-Lag | AMD Anti-Lag |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The Radeon PRO W6400 comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon R9 390 has 8 GB. The Radeon R9 390 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 256-bit vs 512-bit.
| Feature | Radeon PRO W6400 | Radeon R9 390 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 8 GB+100% |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 256-bit | 512-bit+100% |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 1 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12.2 (Radeon PRO W6400) vs 12.0 (Radeon R9 390). Vulkan: 1.2 vs 1.2. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 6.
| Feature | Radeon PRO W6400 | Radeon R9 390 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12.2+2% | 12.0 |
| Vulkan | 1.2 | 1.2 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 2 | 6+200% |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: VCN 3.0 (Radeon PRO W6400) vs VCE 2.0 (Radeon R9 390). Decoder: VCN 3.0 vs UVD 4.2. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 (Decode) (Radeon PRO W6400) vs MPEG-2,H.264,VC-1 (Radeon R9 390).
| Feature | Radeon PRO W6400 | Radeon R9 390 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | VCN 3.0 | VCE 2.0 |
| Decoder | VCN 3.0 | UVD 4.2 |
| Codecs | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 (Decode) | MPEG-2,H.264,VC-1 |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon PRO W6400 draws 50W versus the Radeon R9 390's 300W — a 142.9% difference. The Radeon PRO W6400 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 500W (Radeon PRO W6400) vs 750W (Radeon R9 390). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs 6-pin + 8-pin. Card length: 168mm vs 275mm, occupying 1 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 70°C vs 95°C.
| Feature | Radeon PRO W6400 | Radeon R9 390 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 50W-83% | 300W |
| Recommended PSU | 500W-33% | 750W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | 6-pin + 8-pin |
| Length | 168mm | 275mm |
| Height | 69mm | 109mm |
| Slots | 1-50% | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 70°C-26% | 95°C |
| Perf/Watt | 168.6+472% | 29.5 |
Value Analysis
The Radeon PRO W6400 launched at $229 MSRP, while the Radeon R9 390 launched at $329. The Radeon PRO W6400 costs 30.4% less ($100 savings) on MSRP. Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 36.8 (Radeon PRO W6400) vs 26.9 (Radeon R9 390) — the Radeon PRO W6400 offers 36.8% better value. The Radeon PRO W6400 is the newer GPU (2022 vs 2015).
| Feature | Radeon PRO W6400 | Radeon R9 390 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $229-30% | $329 |
| Performance per Dollar | 36.8+37% | 26.9 |
| Codename | Navi 24 | Grenada |
| Release | January 19 2022 | June 18 2015 |
| Ranking | #308 | #296 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.












