AMD Radeon 610M vs AMD Radeon R7 M340 Comparison

# AMD Radeon 610M vs AMD Radeon R7 M340

The AMD Radeon 610M and AMD Radeon R7 M340 represent two distinct eras of AMD mobile graphics, separated by seven years of architectural evolution. The 610M is a modern integrated GPU built on RDNA 2.0 at 6 nm, while the R7 M340 is a legacy discrete part using GCN 3.0 on 28 nm. Benchmark data shows a split decision: the R7 M340 wins OpenCL by 8%, while the 610M dominates Vulkan by 22.3%. Average scores across both tests place the 610M at 5,444 versus 5,063 for the R7 M340, a 7.5% overall advantage for the newer part.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two benchmark tests tell opposing stories. In Geekbench OpenCL, the AMD Radeon R7 M340 scores 4,932 against 4,535 for the AMD Radeon 610M, a delta of -8% from the 610M's perspective. This is a clear win for the older discrete card, which leverages its 320 shading units and 20 texture mapping units to outcompute the 610M's 128 shaders and 8 TMUs in compute-heavy workloads. The R7 M340's fp32 throughput of 653.4 GFLOPS exceeds the 610M's 486.4 GFLOPS by roughly 34%, and that raw compute advantage shows up directly in the OpenCL result.

The Vulkan test flips the script dramatically. Here the AMD Radeon 610M scores 6,353 versus 5,193 for the R7 M340, a 22.3% margin. This is a substantial victory for the newer architecture, and it reflects more than just clock speed differences. The 610M boosts to 1900 MHz compared to 1021 MHz on the R7 M340, but the architectural gap is the real story. RDNA 2.0's modern shader design and API efficiency give the 610M a decisive edge in Vulkan, where draw call overhead and driver optimization matter more than raw ALU count.

Looking at the nearest rivals provides context for these scores. The 610M's average score of 5,444 places it between the AMD Radeon R7 M365X (5,416, +0.5% for the M365X) and the AMD Radeon R7 M440 (5,483, -0.7% for the 610M). The NVIDIA Quadro M4000 sits at 5,467, just 0.4% ahead. The 610M's 32nd percentile among all GPUs indicates it is a modest performer by absolute standards, but its Vulkan score is the outlier — a result that punches well above its average. The R7 M340's average of 5,063 lands exactly at the AMD Radeon R7 240's score (5,063, 0% delta), with the AMD FirePro W4170M at 5,034 (0.6% behind) and the AMD Radeon R5 M430 at 5,018 (0.9% behind). Its 30th percentile confirms it sits in the lower third of all GPUs, slightly behind the 610M's percentile ranking.

The per-test breakdown reveals that the 610M's Vulkan advantage is not merely a function of its higher average — it is a genuine architectural strength. A 22.3% lead in one test versus an 8% deficit in the other produces a net positive average, but the nature of the wins matters for use-case analysis. OpenCL workloads, which often resemble compute and productivity tasks, favor the R7 M340's wider execution resources. Vulkan gaming workloads strongly favor the 610M.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear split recommendation. For users prioritizing Vulkan-based gaming or modern API performance, the AMD Radeon 610M is the superior choice by a 22.3% margin in that specific test. Its 6,353 Vulkan score is not just higher than the R7 M340's 5,193; it represents a modern architecture that handles contemporary graphics workloads more efficiently. The 610M also holds a 7.5% advantage in average benchmark score (5,444 vs 5,063), making it the better all-around performer in aggregate.

For compute-heavy tasks that rely on OpenCL, the AMD Radeon R7 M340 wins by 8% (4,932 vs 4,535). Its 320 shading units and 20 TMUs provide a wider execution pipeline that older compute code can exploit. Users running legacy OpenCL applications or workloads that do not leverage modern APIs would see better performance from the R7 M340. This is a narrow but real niche where the older card still holds value.

The percentile rankings reinforce this split. The 610M sits at the 32nd percentile versus 30th for the R7 M340 — a small but consistent edge in overall standing. However, neither card is a high performer by modern standards. The 610M's nearest rivals all cluster within 1% of its average score, indicating a highly competitive mid-low tier. The R7 M340's rivals also cluster tightly, with the R7 240 matching its score exactly. The practical takeaway: the 610M is the safer modern choice, especially for Vulkan gaming, while the R7 M340 remains relevant only for specific OpenCL compute scenarios.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is generational. The AMD Radeon 610M uses RDNA 2.0 architecture on a 6 nm TSMC process, while the AMD Radeon R7 M340 uses GCN 3.0 on 28 nm. The process node difference is stark: 6 nm versus 28 nm, representing a major density and efficiency leap. The 610M's die size is 100 mm², smaller than the R7 M340's 125 mm², yet it delivers comparable or better performance in key metrics. The R7 M340's transistor count is 1,550 million with a density of 12.4M per mm²; the 610M's transistor count is not listed, but its smaller die and newer process imply a much higher density.

Core configuration differs significantly. The 610M has 128 shading units, 8 TMUs, and 4 ROPs, while the R7 M340 has 320 shading units, 20 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. The R7 M340 has 2.5 times the shaders and 2.5 times the TMUs, plus double the ROPs. This explains its OpenCL compute advantage. However, the 610M counters with 2 ray tracing cores, a feature the R7 M340 lacks entirely. The 610M also runs at much higher clocks: 1500 MHz base and 1900 MHz boost versus 943 MHz base and 1021 MHz boost on the R7 M340. That 86% higher boost clock partially compensates for the fewer shaders.

Memory configuration is another major divergence. The R7 M340 has dedicated 2 GB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus with 16.00 GB/s bandwidth. The 610M uses system shared memory with bus width and type listed as system shared, and bandwidth described as system dependent. This means the 610M's memory performance varies with the host system's RAM, while the R7 M340 has fixed dedicated memory. The R7 M340's memory clock is 1000 MHz (2 Gbps effective). The 610M's memory clock is listed as system shared, making direct comparison impossible.

API support favors the 610M. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The R7 M340 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The 610M's DirectX 12_2 feature level and newer Vulkan version are critical for modern games and applications. The 610M also uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the R7 M340 uses PCIe 3.0 x8. The 610M's pixel rate is 7.600 GPixel/s and texture rate is 15.20 GTexel/s, versus 8.168 GPixel/s and 20.42 GTexel/s for the R7 M340. The R7 M340 wins both rasterization throughput metrics, consistent with its wider core count.

Power characteristics differ as well. The 610M has a 15 W TDP and is an IGP (integrated graphics processor), meaning it shares power with the CPU. The R7 M340's TDP is not listed, but as a discrete card it would draw separate power. The 610M has no power connectors and a slot width of IGP, while the R7 M340's slot width and power connectors are not listed. The 610M's display outputs are portable device dependent, while the R7 M340's outputs are not specified.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon 610M has an average benchmark score of 5,444, which is 7.5% higher than the AMD Radeon R7 M340's average of 5,063.

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in Vulkan performance?

A: In Geekbench Vulkan, the AMD Radeon 610M scores 6,353 versus 5,193 for the AMD Radeon R7 M340, giving the 610M a 22.3% advantage.

Q: Which GPU wins in OpenCL compute workloads?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 M340 wins Geekbench OpenCL with a score of 4,932 against 4,535 for the AMD Radeon 610M, an 8% margin in favor of the R7 M340.

Q: What are the key architectural differences between the two?

A: The Radeon 610M uses RDNA 2.0 on a 6 nm process with 128 shading units and 2 ray tracing cores, while the R7 M340 uses GCN 3.0 on 28 nm with 320 shading units and no ray tracing support. The 610M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4, while the R7 M340 supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.2.170.

Q: How does memory configuration differ?

A: The R7 M340 has 2 GB of dedicated DDR3 memory on a 64-bit bus with 16.00 GB/s bandwidth. The 610M uses system shared memory, with bandwidth described as system dependent.

Q: What are the nearest rivals for each GPU?

A: The 610M's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA Quadro M4000 (5,467, -0.4% delta), AMD Radeon R7 M365X (5,416, +0.5% delta), AMD Radeon R7 M440 (5,483, -0.7% delta), and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M (5,501, -1% delta). The R7 M340's nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon R7 240 (5,063, 0% delta), AMD FirePro W4170M (5,034, +0.6% delta), AMD Radeon R5 M430 (5,018, +0.9% delta), and AMD Radeon R7 Graphics (4,998, +1.3% delta).

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon 610M wins decisively in Vulkan-based gaming and modern API workloads. Its 22.3% Vulkan lead over the R7 M340 is the single largest margin in the comparison, and it reflects the RDNA 2.0 architecture's efficiency with contemporary graphics APIs. The 610M's support for DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4 positions it for current and near-future titles, while its 2 ray tracing cores provide hardware features the R7 M340 cannot offer. The 610M's higher average score (5,444 vs 5,063) and better percentile ranking (32nd vs 30th) make it the better general-purpose choice. Its 1900 MHz boost clock and 6 nm process also suggest superior power efficiency, though exact wattage for the R7 M340 is not listed. The 610M's PCIe 4.0 x8 interface provides double the bandwidth of the R7 M340's PCIe 3.0 x8, which can benefit data transfer in shared memory configurations.

The AMD Radeon R7 M340 wins in OpenCL compute workloads, where its 320 shading units and 20 TMUs provide a 34% fp32 throughput advantage (653.4 GFLOPS vs 486.4 GFLOPS). This makes it the better choice for legacy compute applications that do not leverage modern APIs. The R7 M340's dedicated 2 GB of DDR3 memory with 16.00 GB/s bandwidth offers predictable memory performance, unlike the 610M's system-dependent shared memory. Its higher pixel rate (8.168 GPixel/s vs 7.600 GPixel/s) and texture rate (20.42 GTexel/s vs 15.20 GTexel/s) indicate stronger raw rasterization throughput, which benefits older games and OpenGL-based applications. The R7 M340's 8% OpenCL win is modest but consistent, and its 1,550 million transistors on a larger 125 mm² die suggest a more compute-oriented design philosophy. For users running CUDA-style compute or OpenCL productivity tools, the R7 M340 remains the safer bet despite its age.

The split is clean: modern gaming and API-forward tasks belong to the 610M; legacy compute and rasterization-heavy OpenCL tasks belong to the R7 M340. The 610M's overall average advantage and newer feature set make it the recommended choice for most users, but the R7 M340's compute headroom in OpenCL means it is not entirely obsolete. Both cards sit in the low-to-mid tier of GPU performance (32nd and 30th percentiles), so neither will satisfy high-end gaming demands. The 610M's Vulkan score is its standout feature, and for users who prioritize that API, it is the clear winner.