AMD Radeon 540 vs AMD Radeon R5 M240 Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon 540 has an average benchmark score of 7673, while the AMD Radeon R5 M240 scores 6975. This places the Radeon 540 at the 41st percentile of all GPUs, versus the 39th percentile for the R5 M240.

Q: How do the two cards compare in the Geekbench OpenCL test?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M240 wins the only shared head-to-head benchmark, scoring 6975 in Geekbench OpenCL against the Radeon 540's 6184. That is an 11.3% advantage for the R5 M240 in this specific test.

Q: What are the architecture generations of these two GPUs?

A: The AMD Radeon 540 is based on GCN 4.0 architecture using the Lexa chip, part of the Polaris (RX 500) generation. The AMD Radeon R5 M240 uses older GCN 1.0 architecture with the Jet chip, from the Gem System (R5 M200) generation.

Q: Which GPU has a smaller manufacturing process node?

A: The AMD Radeon 540 is built on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries, while the AMD Radeon R5 M240 uses a 28 nm process at TSMC. The Radeon 540 also packs 2,200 million transistors on a 103 mm² die, versus 690 million transistors on a 56 mm² die for the R5 M240.

Q: What memory configurations do these cards use?

A: Both have 1024 MB of memory, but the Radeon 540 uses GDDR5 on a 32-bit bus with 24.00 GB/s bandwidth. The Radeon R5 M240 uses DDR3 on a 64-bit bus with 14.40 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU supports newer API versions?

A: The AMD Radeon 540 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The AMD Radeon R5 M240 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural eras within AMD's lineup. The Radeon 540 is a GCN 4.0 part built on the Lexa chip, belonging to the Polaris (RX 500) generation. The R5 M240 is a GCN 1.0 design using the Jet chip from the Gem System (R5 M200) generation. This generational gap manifests in several fundamental design choices.

Manufacturing technology separates them clearly. The Radeon 540 uses a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries, allowing 2,200 million transistors on a 103 mm² die for a transistor density of 21.4M per mm². The R5 M240 uses TSMC's 28 nm node, housing 690 million transistors on a 56 mm² die at 12.3M per mm². The newer node enables nearly three times the transistor count in less than double the die area.

Compute resources also differ. The Radeon 540 has 384 shading units, 24 texture mapping units, and 16 ROPs. The R5 M240 has 320 shading units, 20 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. These raw counts give the Radeon 540 a theoretical FP32 performance of 908.5 GFLOPS, while the R5 M240 delivers 659.2 GFLOPS. The Radeon 540 also supports FP16 at 908.5 GFLOPS (1:1), while the R5 M240 lists no FP16 capability.

Clock behavior differs as well. The R5 M240 has a base clock of 1000 MHz and a boost clock of 1030 MHz. The Radeon 540 lists no base or boost clocks in the data, but its memory runs at 1500 MHz (6 Gbps effective) versus 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective) for the R5 M240.

Memory architecture is another divergence. The Radeon 540 uses GDDR5 on a 32-bit bus, achieving 24.00 GB/s bandwidth. The R5 M240 uses DDR3 on a 64-bit bus, yielding only 14.40 GB/s. Despite the narrower bus, the GDDR5's higher clock gives the Radeon 540 a 67% bandwidth advantage. The R5 M240's wider bus cannot compensate for the slower memory technology.

API support reflects the newer architecture. The Radeon 540 supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3, while the R5 M240 is limited to DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170. Both support OpenGL 4.6. The Radeon 540 also lists display outputs as 2x DisplayPort 1.4a, while the R5 M240 has no display output information.

The Verdict

The benchmark data presents a nuanced picture. The Radeon 540 has the higher average score at 7673, which is 10% above the R5 M240's 6975. Yet the only direct head-to-head test, Geekbench OpenCL, goes the other way: the R5 M240 wins by 11.3%. This contradiction requires careful interpretation.

For users prioritizing overall synthetic performance, the Radeon 540 is the stronger choice. Its 41st percentile ranking versus 39th for the R5 M240 shows it sits slightly higher in the global GPU distribution. The Radeon 540's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti (delta -0.6%), AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 (delta 1.2%), AMD Radeon R7 250 (delta 1.5%), and Intel Arc A310 (delta 1.6%). These are all closely clustered within 2.2 percentage points, indicating the Radeon 540 competes in a tight performance band.

The R5 M240's nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M (delta 0.4%), NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M (delta -0.7%), NVIDIA T600 (delta -0.8%), and AMD FirePro M5100 (delta 2.1%). This cluster spans roughly 2.9 percentage points, similarly tight but at a lower absolute performance level.

However, the Geekbench OpenCL result complicates a simple recommendation. The R5 M240's 6975 score in that test is notably higher than the Radeon 540's 6184. Users whose workloads resemble that specific benchmark might find the older card unexpectedly competitive. Still, with only one shared test and the Radeon 540's higher average across all benchmarks, the data favors the newer GPU for general purposes.

The Radeon 540 also brings architectural advantages in memory bandwidth, pixel rate (18.93 GPixel/s versus 8.24 GPixel/s), and texture rate (28.39 GTexel/s versus 20.60 GTexel/s). These suggest it handles higher resolutions and texture-heavy workloads better. The R5 M240's sole victory in the head-to-head test does not overturn the broader performance picture.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon 540 | AMD Radeon R5 M240 |

|---|---|---|

| Architecture | GCN 4.0 | GCN 1.0 |

| Process Node | 14 nm | 28 nm |

| Foundry | GlobalFoundries | TSMC |

| Transistors | 2,200 million | 690 million |

| Die Size | 103 mm² | 56 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 21.4M / mm² | 12.3M / mm² |

| Base Clock | N/A | 1000 MHz |

| Boost Clock | N/A | 1030 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1500 MHz (6 Gbps effective) | 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective) |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | DDR3 |

| Memory Bus Width | 32 bit | 64 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 24.00 GB/s | 14.40 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 384 | 320 |

| TMUs | 24 | 20 |

| ROPs | 16 | 8 |

| Pixel Rate | 18.93 GPixel/s | 8.240 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 28.39 GTexel/s | 20.60 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 908.5 GFLOPS | 659.2 GFLOPS |

| FP16 | 908.5 GFLOPS (1:1) | N/A |

| TDP | 50 W | N/A |

| Slot Width | Single-slot | N/A |

| Power Connectors | None | N/A |

| Suggested PSU | 250 W | N/A |

| Display Outputs | 2x DisplayPort 1.4a | N/A |

| DirectX | 12 (12_0) | 12 (11_1) |

| Vulkan | 1.3 | 1.2.170 |

| Release Date | 2017-04-19 | 2014-09-17 |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

Only one benchmark appears in the head-to-head data: Geekbench OpenCL. The AMD Radeon R5 M240 wins this test with a score of 6975 against the Radeon 540's 6184, a delta of -11.3% from the Radeon 540's perspective. This is a substantial single-test victory for the older GPU.

This result is striking given the Radeon 540's architectural advantages. The newer card has 20% more shading units, 50% more ROPs, 67% higher memory bandwidth, and 38% higher FP32 throughput. Yet in this particular OpenCL workload, the R5 M240 outperforms it. The R5 M240's higher boost clock of 1030 MHz relative to the Radeon 540's unspecified clocks may contribute, but the data does not reveal the precise cause.

Beyond the head-to-head, the average benchmark scores tell a different story. The Radeon 540's avgBenchmarkScore of 7673 includes both its Geekbench OpenCL result (6184) and a Geekbench Vulkan result (9162). The Vulkan score is notably strong, suggesting the Radeon 540 excels in Vulkan workloads even while lagging in OpenCL. The R5 M240 has no Vulkan benchmark recorded, making its 6975 average identical to its single OpenCL score.

The percentile rankings reinforce the average score picture. The Radeon 540 sits at the 41st percentile of all GPUs, while the R5 M240 sits at the 39th. This two-percentile gap is modest but consistent with the Radeon 540's higher average. The nearest rival data shows the Radeon 540 tracking within 1.6% of the AMD Radeon R7 250 and 1.2% of the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100, while the R5 M240 sits within 0.4% of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon 540 wins in overall synthetic performance. Its average benchmark score of 7673 exceeds the R5 M240's 6975 by 698 points, roughly 10%. It also wins on every major computational metric: FP32 (908.5 GFLOPS versus 659.2 GFLOPS), pixel rate (18.93 GPixel/s versus 8.24 GPixel/s), texture rate (28.39 GTexel/s versus 20.60 GTexel/s), and memory bandwidth (24.00 GB/s versus 14.40 GB/s). For applications that leverage these capabilities, particularly those using Vulkan, the Radeon 540 is clearly ahead. Its Vulkan score of 9162 demonstrates strength in modern graphics APIs.

The AMD Radeon R5 M240 wins the only direct head-to-head benchmark available. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 6975 beats the Radeon 540's 6184 by 11.3%. This indicates that for OpenCL compute workloads specifically, the older card holds an advantage. The R5 M240 also has a wider 64-bit memory bus, which may benefit certain access patterns despite the lower overall bandwidth.

The use-case split follows these results. Users running OpenCL compute tasks that resemble the Geekbench OpenCL test may see better performance from the R5 M240. Users targeting Vulkan-based applications or needing higher pixel and texture throughput should choose the Radeon 540. The Radeon 540 also offers modern API support (Vulkan 1.3 and DirectX 12_0) and a defined power profile at 50 W TDP with no power connectors and a 250 W suggested PSU, making it more suitable for system integration. The R5 M240 lacks TDP, slot width, and power connector data, leaving its system requirements unspecified.

For legacy OpenCL workloads, the R5 M240's surprising victory makes it defensible. For everything else, the Radeon 540's architectural and synthetic benchmark advantages point to it as the superior choice. The data does not support a universal winner, but the Radeon 540 wins more categories and wins the overall average score.