AMD Radeon 610M vs AMD Radeon R5 M435 Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score in the database?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M435 records an average benchmark score of 5859, while the AMD Radeon 610M records an average of 5444. The R5 M435 sits in the 33rd percentile of all GPUs, and the 610M sits in the 32nd percentile.

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in the OpenCL benchmark?

A: In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the AMD Radeon R5 M435 scores 5859 against 4535 for the AMD Radeon 610M. That is a 29.2% advantage for the R5 M435 in this specific test.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon 610M have any benchmark win over the R5 M435?

A: In the head-to-head benchmark data, the R5 M435 wins the only shared test (OpenCL). The 610M has an additional recorded Vulkan score of 6353, but no shared test is won by the 610M.

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

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M435 uses the GCN 1.0 architecture from the Gem System (R5 M400) generation. The AMD Radeon 610M uses the RDNA 2.0 architecture from the Navi II IGP (Mendocino Mobile) generation.

Q: What is the process node difference between the two chips?

A: The R5 M435 is built on a 28 nm process at TSMC, while the 610M is built on a 6 nm process, also at TSMC. The die size is 56 mm² for the R5 M435 and 100 mm² for the 610M.

Q: What are the DirectX support levels for each GPU?

A: The R5 M435 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), while the 610M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). Both support OpenGL 4.6, but the Vulkan versions differ: 1.2.170 for the R5 M435 and 1.4 for the 610M.

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the AMD Radeon R5 M435 is the faster GPU in raw compute performance. Its average score of 5859 beats the 610M's 5444 by a meaningful margin, and in the only directly comparable test, the OpenCL workload, the R5 M435 leads by 29.2%. For users prioritizing compute throughput in older DirectX 11-era applications or OpenCL workloads, the R5 M435 is the clear choice.

However, the AMD Radeon 610M is the more modern part. It uses RDNA 2.0, a 6 nm process, supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, and has a much higher boost clock. The 610M also records a Vulkan score of 6353, which suggests it may handle Vulkan-based workloads better than the R5 M435, though no direct Vulkan comparison exists in the database. The 610M is also rated at a 15 W TDP, while the R5 M435 has no TDP listed, so power efficiency favors the newer chip.

For users who need maximum OpenCL compute performance from these two options, the R5 M435 is the pick. For users who need modern API support, a smaller process node, and likely better power behavior in a portable device, the 610M is the pick. The data does not support a general "one is better" verdict; it supports a workload-specific decision.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only shared benchmark in the database is Geekbench OpenCL. Here, the AMD Radeon R5 M435 scores 5859, and the AMD Radeon 610M scores 4535. The delta is 29.2% in favor of the R5 M435, which is a substantial lead. For context, the R5 M435's nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon R7 M465 at 5841 (0.3% behind the R5 M435) and the Intel UHD Graphics 730 at 5929 (1.2% ahead). The 610M's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA Quadro M4000 at 5467 (0.4% ahead of the 610M) and the AMD Radeon R7 M440 at 5483 (0.7% ahead).

The R5 M435's OpenCL score places it slightly below the Intel UHD Graphics 730 and slightly above the R7 M465, meaning it is competitive with mid-range integrated and discrete parts from its era. The 610M's OpenCL score places it below all four of its nearest rivals listed, with the closest being the AMD Radeon R7 M365X at 5416 (0.5% behind the 610M). This indicates the 610M is weaker in OpenCL than its immediate competitors, while the R5 M435 is right in the middle of its own peer group.

The 610M does have a separate Vulkan score of 6353, which is higher than its OpenCL score. No Vulkan score is recorded for the R5 M435, so a direct comparison in that API is not possible from the data. The presence of a Vulkan score for the 610M and its higher value relative to its OpenCL result suggests the RDNA 2.0 architecture handles Vulkan more efficiently than OpenCL, but the database does not provide a comparable number for the R5 M435.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every hardware specification recorded. The R5 M435 uses a 64-bit memory bus with 2 GB of dedicated GDDR5 memory, delivering 36.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The 610M uses system-shared memory, so its size, type, bus width, and bandwidth are all listed as "System Shared" or "System Dependent." This is a fundamental difference: dedicated VRAM versus shared system memory.

Clock speeds differ significantly. The R5 M435 has a base clock of 780 MHz and a boost clock of 1030 MHz, with memory clocked at 1125 MHz (4.5 Gbps effective). The 610M has a base clock of 1500 MHz and a boost clock of 1900 MHz, with no separate memory clock because it uses system memory.

The R5 M435 has 320 shading units, 20 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. The 610M has 128 shading units, 8 TMUs, and 4 ROPs. The R5 M435 has no ray tracing cores, while the 610M has 2. Pixel rate is 8.240 GPixel/s for the R5 M435 and 7.600 GPixel/s for the 610M. Texture rate is 20.60 GTexel/s for the R5 M435 and 15.20 GTexel/s for the 610M. FP32 performance is 659.2 GFLOPS for the R5 M435 and 486.4 GFLOPS for the 610M. The 610M lists FP16 performance at 972.8 GFLOPS (2:1), while the R5 M435 has no FP16 figure.

The bus interface differs: PCIe 3.0 x8 for the R5 M435 versus PCIe 4.0 x8 for the 610M. The 610M has a TDP of 15 W and no power connectors, while the R5 M435 has no TDP listed. Both are IGP slot width and have "Portable Device Dependent" display outputs. The R5 M435 is end-of-life with a release date of 2016-05-14, and the 610M is end-of-life with a release date of 2022-09-19. The R5 M435's predecessor is "Solar System" and its successor is "Polaris Mobile"; the 610M's predecessor is "Vega II IGP" and its successor is "Navi III IGP."

Architecture Differences

The R5 M435 uses the GCN 1.0 architecture on a 28 nm TSMC process, with 690 million transistors on a 56 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 12.3M per mm². The 610M uses RDNA 2.0 on a 6 nm TSMC process, with no transistor count listed and a 100 mm² die. The architectural gap is roughly two generations: GCN 1.0 from 2016 versus RDNA 2.0 from 2022.

The R5 M435 has 320 shading units, which is more than double the 610M's 128 shading units, but the 610M compensates with a much higher clock speed (1900 MHz boost versus 1030 MHz boost). Despite fewer units, the 610M's architecture is newer and more efficient per clock, but the raw FP32 numbers still favor the R5 M435: 659.2 GFLOPS versus 486.4 GFLOPS.

The 610M includes 2 ray tracing cores, which the R5 M435 lacks entirely. This is a feature-level difference that reflects the RDNA 2.0 architecture's support for hardware ray tracing. The 610M also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the R5 M435 only supports DirectX 12 (11_1). Vulkan support is newer on the 610M (1.4 versus 1.2.170). Both support OpenGL 4.6.

The 610M uses PCIe 4.0 x8, which doubles the bandwidth per lane compared to the R5 M435's PCIe 3.0 x8. However, because the 610M relies on system-shared memory, its actual memory bandwidth is "System Dependent," which may or may not exceed the R5 M435's dedicated 36.00 GB/s depending on the host platform.

The process node difference is stark: 28 nm versus 6 nm. This explains the 610M's 15 W TDP despite a larger die (100 mm²), while the R5 M435 has no TDP listed but uses a smaller die (56 mm²) on an older, less efficient node.

Where Each One Wins

AMD Radeon R5 M435 wins: The R5 M435 wins in OpenCL compute performance by 29.2% over the 610M. It also wins in raw FP32 throughput (659.2 GFLOPS versus 486.4 GFLOPS), pixel rate (8.240 GPixel/s versus 7.600 GPixel/s), and texture rate (20.60 GTexel/s versus 15.20 GTexel/s). Its dedicated 2 GB GDDR5 memory with 36.00 GB/s bandwidth provides predictable memory performance, unlike the 610M's system-dependent shared memory. For older DirectX 11-era games or OpenCL compute tasks, the R5 M435 is the stronger choice.

AMD Radeon 610M wins: The 610M wins on architectural modernity. It uses RDNA 2.0 on a 6 nm process, supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, includes 2 ray tracing cores, and has Vulkan 1.4 support. Its boost clock of 1900 MHz is nearly double the R5 M435's 1030 MHz. The 610M has a recorded Vulkan score of 6353, which is higher than its OpenCL score, indicating strong Vulkan performance. Its 15 W TDP makes it a plausible choice for power-constrained portable devices, though the R5 M435 has no TDP listed for comparison.

Use-case split: For compute-heavy OpenCL workloads or older DirectX 11 applications, the R5 M435's higher FP32 and texture rates make it the better option. For modern games or applications that use DirectX 12 Ultimate features, ray tracing, or Vulkan, the 610M is the better option, provided its system-shared memory does not bottleneck performance. The database shows one clear win for the R5 M435 in the shared OpenCL test, but the 610M's API support and Vulkan score suggest it is better suited to current software.