
M1 8-Core GPU
Popular choices:

Radeon R9 M395
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.
M1 8-Core GPU
2020Why buy it
- β More future proof: Unknown architecture on 5nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
- β Draws 30W instead of 75W, a 45W reduction.
- β More future proof: Unknown architecture on 5nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
Trade-offs
- βLower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0 vs 16.4 G3D/$ (Unknown MSRP vs $300 MSRP).
Radeon R9 M395
2015Why buy it
- β Delivers 100+% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 16.4 vs 0 G3D/$ ($300 MSRP vs Unknown MSRP).
Trade-offs
- βVery weak future-proofing: 2015-era hardware with 2 GB of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
- β150% higher power demand at 75W vs 30W.
M1 8-Core GPU
2020Radeon R9 M395
2015Why buy it
- β More future proof: Unknown architecture on 5nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
- β Draws 30W instead of 75W, a 45W reduction.
- β More future proof: Unknown architecture on 5nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
Why buy it
- β Delivers 100+% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 16.4 vs 0 G3D/$ ($300 MSRP vs Unknown MSRP).
Trade-offs
- βLower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0 vs 16.4 G3D/$ (Unknown MSRP vs $300 MSRP).
Trade-offs
- βVery weak future-proofing: 2015-era hardware with 2 GB of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
- β150% higher power demand at 75W vs 30W.
Quick Answers
So, is M1 8-Core GPU better than Radeon R9 M395?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper card?
Is Radeon R9 M395 still worth buying for gaming in 2026?
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 | M1 8-Core GPU | Radeon R9 M395 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 91 FPS | 77 FPS |
| medium | 81 FPS | 63 FPS |
| high | 56 FPS | 49 FPS |
| ultra | 44 FPS | 32 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 74 FPS | 67 FPS |
| medium | 63 FPS | 54 FPS |
| high | 42 FPS | 38 FPS |
| ultra | 33 FPS | 24 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 35 FPS | 24 FPS |
| medium | 33 FPS | 23 FPS |
| high | 20 FPS | 15 FPS |
| ultra | 18 FPS | 13 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | M1 8-Core GPU | Radeon R9 M395 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 123 FPS | 84 FPS |
| medium | 92 FPS | 58 FPS |
| high | 66 FPS | 42 FPS |
| ultra | 43 FPS | 27 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 83 FPS | 48 FPS |
| medium | 56 FPS | 28 FPS |
| high | 41 FPS | 20 FPS |
| ultra | 29 FPS | 14 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 37 FPS | 16 FPS |
| medium | 27 FPS | 10 FPS |
| high | 21 FPS | 8 FPS |
| ultra | 15 FPS | 6 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | M1 8-Core GPU | Radeon R9 M395 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 225 FPS | 222 FPS |
| medium | 180 FPS | 178 FPS |
| high | 150 FPS | 148 FPS |
| ultra | 112 FPS | 111 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 169 FPS | 167 FPS |
| medium | 135 FPS | 133 FPS |
| high | 112 FPS | 111 FPS |
| ultra | 84 FPS | 83 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 112 FPS | 111 FPS |
| medium | 90 FPS | 89 FPS |
| high | 75 FPS | 74 FPS |
| ultra | 56 FPS | 56 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | M1 8-Core GPU | Radeon R9 M395 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 184 FPS | 129 FPS |
| medium | 139 FPS | 105 FPS |
| high | 125 FPS | 90 FPS |
| ultra | 102 FPS | 73 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 147 FPS | 97 FPS |
| medium | 109 FPS | 80 FPS |
| high | 89 FPS | 69 FPS |
| ultra | 72 FPS | 55 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 78 FPS | 57 FPS |
| medium | 58 FPS | 44 FPS |
| high | 51 FPS | 35 FPS |
| ultra | 40 FPS | 26 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of M1 8-Core GPU and Radeon R9 M395
M1 8-Core GPU
M1 8-Core GPU
The M1 8-Core GPU is manufactured by Apple. It was released in November 10 2020. The core clock speed is 1278 MHz. It has 8 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 30W. Manufactured using 5 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 5,000 points.

Radeon R9 M395
Radeon R9 M395
The Radeon R9 M395 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in June 9 2015. It features the GCN architecture. The core clock speed is 834 MHz. It has 1792 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 4,934 points.
Graphics Performance
The M1 8-Core GPU scores 5,000 and the Radeon R9 M395 reaches 4,934 in the G3D Mark benchmark β just a 1.3% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. Shader units: 8 (M1 8-Core GPU) vs 1,792 (Radeon R9 M395).
| Feature | M1 8-Core GPU | Radeon R9 M395 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 5,000+1% | 4,934 |
| Process Node | 5 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 8 | 1792+22300% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | M1 8-Core GPU | Radeon R9 M395 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | Upscaling support | FSR Upscaling / FSR 4 |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | AMD Anti-Lag |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 2 GB of video memory. Memory bandwidth: 68 GB/s (M1 8-Core GPU) vs 176 GB/s (Radeon R9 M395) β a 158.8% advantage for the Radeon R9 M395. Bus width: Unified vs 256-bit.
| Feature | M1 8-Core GPU | Radeon R9 M395 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 2 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory Type | Shared | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 68 GB/s | 176 GB/s+159% |
| Bus Width | Unified | 256-bit |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: N/A (M1 8-Core GPU) vs 12 (FL12_0) (Radeon R9 M395). OpenGL: 4.1 (Rosetta 2) vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 3.
| Feature | M1 8-Core GPU | Radeon R9 M395 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | N/A | 12 (FL12_0) |
| OpenGL | 4.1 (Rosetta 2) | 4.6+12% |
| Max Displays | 2 | 3+50% |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: Apple M1 Video Encoder (M1 8-Core GPU) vs UVD (Radeon R9 M395). Decoder: Apple M1 Video Decoder vs VCE. Supported codecs: H.264,HEVC,ProRes,ProRes RAW (M1 8-Core GPU) vs H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1,MPEG-4 (Radeon R9 M395).
| Feature | M1 8-Core GPU | Radeon R9 M395 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | Apple M1 Video Encoder | UVD |
| Decoder | Apple M1 Video Decoder | VCE |
| Codecs | H.264,HEVC,ProRes,ProRes RAW | H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1,MPEG-4 |
Power & Dimensions
The M1 8-Core GPU draws 30W versus the Radeon R9 M395's 75W β a 85.7% difference. The M1 8-Core GPU is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (M1 8-Core GPU) vs 350W (Radeon R9 M395). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs Mobile.
| Feature | M1 8-Core GPU | Radeon R9 M395 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 30W-60% | 75W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | Mobile |
| Length | β | 0mm |
| Height | β | 0mm |
| Slots | 0 | 0 |
| Temp (Load) | β | 75Β°C |
| Perf/Watt | 166.7+153% | 65.8 |
Value Analysis
The M1 8-Core GPU launched at $0 MSRP, while the Radeon R9 M395 launched at $300. The M1 8-Core GPU costs 100+% less ($300 savings) on MSRP. Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): Infinity (M1 8-Core GPU) vs 16.4 (Radeon R9 M395) β the M1 8-Core GPU offers Infinity% better value. The M1 8-Core GPU is the newer GPU (2020 vs 2015).
| Feature | M1 8-Core GPU | Radeon R9 M395 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $0-100% | $300 |
| Performance per Dollar | Infinity | 16.4 |
| Release | November 10 2020 | June 9 2015 |
| Ranking | #428 | #445 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.













