AMD Radeon 610M vs AMD Radeon R7 240 Comparison

The AMD Radeon 610M and the AMD Radeon R7 240 represent two distinct approaches to graphics processing, separated by nearly a decade of architectural evolution. The 610M is a modern integrated graphics processor (IGP) built for mobility, while the R7 240 is a legacy discrete desktop card. The data available for direct comparison is limited but revealing, showing that the older, dedicated part still holds a performance edge in at least one synthetic workload, despite the newer part’s technological advantages.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison in the data is the Geekbench OpenCL test, which measures general-purpose compute performance. Here, the AMD Radeon R7 240 decisively outperforms the AMD Radeon 610M. The R7 240 scores 5063 points, while the 610M manages only 4535 points. This translates to a delta of -10.4% for the 610M, meaning the R7 240 is approximately 10.4% faster in this specific test. This is a significant margin for a head-to-head comparison, indicating that the R7 240's dedicated memory and higher raw compute throughput provide a tangible benefit in this workload.

This result is somewhat counterintuitive given the generational leap in architecture. The 610M is built on a 6 nm process with RDNA 2.0 architecture, while the R7 240 uses a 28 nm process with the much older GCN 1.0 architecture. However, the R7 240 has a substantial advantage in raw hardware resources. It features 320 shading units, 20 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 8 raster operation units (ROPs), compared to the 610M's 128 shading units, 8 TMUs, and 4 ROPs. This 2.5x advantage in shader count and TMUs, combined with a dedicated 2 GB of DDR3 memory on a 128-bit bus, likely offsets the architectural inefficiencies of the older GCN design in this compute test.

Conversely, the 610M has a separate benchmark result that the R7 240 lacks: a Geekbench Vulkan score of 6353. This score is notably higher than its own OpenCL score of 4535, suggesting the 610M is much more efficient in the Vulkan API. This is a critical data point, as modern games and applications increasingly rely on Vulkan for low-level hardware access. While a direct head-to-head comparison in Vulkan is not possible due to missing data for the R7 240, the 610M's strong Vulkan showing implies it could be the better choice for modern graphics workloads that leverage this API. The R7 240 supports Vulkan 1.2.170, but its GCN 1.0 architecture is not optimized for it in the same way as RDNA 2.0.

Where Each One Wins

The data paints a clear picture of distinct strengths for each GPU. The AMD Radeon R7 240 wins in raw compute performance as measured by OpenCL. Its dedicated memory subsystem and higher core counts give it a lead in this specific area. This suggests it would be more capable in compute-heavy tasks like video encoding or certain productivity applications that are optimized for OpenCL. Its 2 GB of dedicated GDDR3 memory also means it does not have to compete with the system's CPU for bandwidth, which is a fundamental advantage for a discrete card.

The AMD Radeon 610M, on the other hand, wins on the basis of its modern feature set and API support. Its Vulkan score of 6353 is far higher than its OpenCL score, indicating a much more efficient driver and hardware path for this modern API. This is a strong indicator for gaming performance, as Vulkan is becoming a standard in new game engines. Furthermore, the 610M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), which includes features like ray tracing (via its 2 RT cores) and variable rate shading, while the R7 240 is limited to DirectX 12 (11_1). For any modern, graphics-intensive workload, the 610M’s architectural support for these features is a significant advantage, even if its raw OpenCL compute is lower.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gulf between these two GPUs is vast. The 610M is based on the RDNA 2.0 architecture and is manufactured on a 6 nm process by TSMC, with a die size of 100 mm². It is an integrated part of the Mendocino chip, designed for mobile processors. Its memory is "System Shared," meaning it relies on the system's main RAM for both capacity and bandwidth, which is described as "System Dependent." This is a major bottleneck compared to a dedicated VRAM solution.

The R7 240 is based on the GCN 1.0 architecture and uses an older, larger 28 nm process, also from TSMC. It has a smaller die size of 77 mm² but packs more transistors (950 million) than the 610M, which has a transistor count that is not listed. The R7 240 is a discrete card with its own 2 GB of DDR3 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing a fixed 28.80 GB/s of bandwidth. This is a critical difference. While the 610M's memory bandwidth is variable and dependent on the host system, the R7 240 has a dedicated, albeit relatively low, bandwidth pool.

The 610M clocks are much higher, with a base of 1500 MHz and a boost of 1900 MHz, compared to the R7 240's base of 730 MHz and boost of 780 MHz. This clock speed advantage helps the 610M compensate for its lower core count, but the R7 240 still wins in OpenCL. The 610M has 2 RT cores, while the R7 240 has none. The 610M also supports a newer Vulkan version (1.4) and features a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface, compared to the R7 240's PCIe 3.0 x8. The R7 240's TDP is double that of the 610M (30W vs 15W), highlighting the efficiency gains of the newer process node.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in the Geekbench OpenCL benchmark?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 240 is faster, scoring 5063 points compared to the AMD Radeon 610M's 4535 points. This gives the R7 240 a 10.4% lead in this specific test.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon 610M have any benchmark advantage?

A: Yes. While it lacks a direct comparison in Vulkan, the 610M scores 6353 points in Geekbench Vulkan, which is significantly higher than its own OpenCL score of 4535. This suggests a major performance advantage in the Vulkan API.

Q: How do their memory configurations differ?

A: The AMD Radeon 610M uses "System Shared" memory, meaning it relies on the system's main RAM and has "System Dependent" bandwidth. The AMD Radeon R7 240 has a dedicated 2 GB of DDR3 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing a fixed 28.80 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: What are the key architectural differences in API support?

A: The AMD Radeon 610M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4. The AMD Radeon R7 240 supports the older DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170. The 610M also has 2 RT cores, which the R7 240 lacks.

Q: Which GPU has a higher core count?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 240 has a significantly higher core count, with 320 shading units, 20 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. The AMD Radeon 610M has 128 shading units, 8 TMUs, and 4 ROPs.

Q: What are the production statuses of these two GPUs?

A: Both are listed as "End-of-life." The AMD Radeon 610M was released on 2022-09-19, while the AMD Radeon R7 240 was released much earlier on 2013-10-07.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the data, the choice between these two GPUs depends entirely on the workload. For raw, compute-heavy tasks that rely on OpenCL, the AMD Radeon R7 240 is the clear winner, offering 10.4% more performance in the only direct benchmark available. Its dedicated memory and higher core counts make it a more capable part for this specific use case.

However, for modern gaming and applications, the AMD Radeon 610M is the more logical choice. Its Vulkan score of 6353, while not directly comparable to the R7 240, is a strong indicator of superior performance in modern APIs. Crucially, it supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, which are required for the latest graphics features like ray tracing. The R7 240, with its DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170 support, is architecturally obsolete for these tasks. The 610M also achieves this with a 15 W TDP, half that of the R7 240's 30 W, making it far more efficient.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon 610M | AMD Radeon R7 240 |

| :--- | :--- | :--- |

| Architecture | RDNA 2.0 | GCN 1.0 |

| Process Node | 6 nm | 28 nm |

| Chip | Mendocino | Oland |

| Die Size | 100 mm² | 77 mm² |

| Transistors | Not listed | 950 million |

| Base Clock | 1500 MHz | 730 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1900 MHz | 780 MHz |

| Memory Size | System Shared | 2 GB |

| Memory Type | System Shared | DDR3 |

| Memory Bus Width | System Shared | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | System Dependent | 28.80 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 128 | 320 |

| TMUs | 8 | 20 |

| ROPs | 4 | 8 |

| RT Cores | 2 | None |

| TDP | 15 W | 30 W |

| Pixel Rate | 7.600 GPixel/s | 6.240 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 15.20 GTexel/s | 15.60 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 486.4 GFLOPS | 499.2 GFLOPS |

| DirectX Support | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12 (11_1) |

| Vulkan Support | 1.4 | 1.2.170 |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |

| Slot Width | IGP | Single-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | None |

| Release Date | 2022-09-19 | 2013-10-07 |

| Launch MSRP | Not listed | 69 USD |