AMD Radeon 610M vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760M Comparison

# AMD Radeon 610M vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760M

The Verdict

The benchmark data presents a split decision between these two end-of-life mobile graphics solutions. The AMD Radeon 610M and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760M each claim one head-to-head victory, yet the nature of those wins tells very different stories about their respective strengths. The GTX 760M, built on NVIDIA's Kepler architecture from the GeForce 700M generation, dominates in OpenCL compute workloads with a score of 5,604 against the Radeon's 4,535—a decisive 19.1% margin. Conversely, the Radeon 610M, based on RDNA 2.0 with the Mendocino chip, delivers a crushing 30.5% advantage in Vulkan performance, scoring 6,353 versus 4,868.

For users prioritizing raw compute throughput in OpenCL-accelerated applications, the GTX 760M is the clear choice. Its 768 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 16 raster operations pipelines provide substantially more parallel hardware than the Radeon's 128 shading units, 8 TMUs, and 4 ROPs. However, the Radeon counters with modern API support—DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) versus the GTX 760M's older DirectX 12 (11_0)—and significantly newer process technology at 6 nm versus 28 nm. The average benchmark scores reinforce this split: the Radeon 610M averages 5,444 across its benchmark suite, while the GTX 760M averages 5,236, placing the Radeon fractionally ahead overall despite its OpenCL deficit.

The percentile rankings are nearly identical, with the Radeon at the 32nd percentile and the GTX 760M at the 31st percentile of all GPUs. Neither part is positioned for high-end gaming, but the Radeon's Vulkan advantage suggests better forward-looking API performance, while the GTX 760M's OpenCL strength serves legacy compute workloads. The GTX 760M's 2 GB of dedicated GDDR5 memory with 64.13 GB/s bandwidth contrasts sharply with the Radeon's system-shared memory, which is inherently system-dependent. For gaming, the Vulkan result favors the Radeon; for compute, the OpenCL result favors NVIDIA.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon 610M edges ahead with an average benchmark score of 5,444, compared to the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760M's 5,236—a difference of roughly 4%.

Q: How do the two compare in Vulkan performance?

A: The Radeon 610M wins decisively in the Geekbench Vulkan test, scoring 6,353 against the GTX 760M's 4,868, representing a 30.5% advantage for AMD.

Q: What about OpenCL performance?

A: The GTX 760M takes the OpenCL crown, scoring 5,604 versus the Radeon's 4,535, giving NVIDIA a 19.1% lead in that specific benchmark.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The GTX 760M features 768 shading units, a substantial increase over the Radeon 610M's 128 shading units, reflecting their different architectural approaches.

Q: Do these GPUs support modern graphics APIs?

A: The Radeon 610M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, while the GTX 760M supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.2.175. Both support OpenGL 4.6.

Q: Which GPU has dedicated memory?

A: The GTX 760M comes with 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus with 64.13 GB/s bandwidth, whereas the Radeon 610M uses system-shared memory, making its bandwidth system-dependent.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two GPUs is generational and profound. The AMD Radeon 610M is built on the RDNA 2.0 architecture, manufactured on a 6 nm process at TSMC with a 100 mm² die size. This is a modern integrated graphics processor from the Navi II IGP generation, specifically the Mendocino chip, designed for low-power mobile devices. Its 128 shading units operate at a base clock of 1500 MHz with a boost clock of 1900 MHz, and it includes 2 ray tracing cores—a feature entirely absent from the much older NVIDIA part. The RDNA 2.0 architecture brings support for DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, positioning it for contemporary gaming APIs.

In contrast, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760M is a discrete GPU from the GeForce 700M generation, built on the Kepler architecture using the GK106S chip. Manufactured on TSMC's 28 nm process, the die measures 221 mm² and contains 2,540 million transistors, yielding a transistor density of 11.5 million per mm². The Kepler architecture, while revolutionary in its day, lacks ray tracing support and is limited to DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.2.175. The GTX 760M's 768 shading units are clocked much lower—628 MHz base and 719 MHz boost—reflecting the older process node's power characteristics. The GTX 760M also uses an MXM module form factor, whereas the Radeon 610M is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with no separate slot width.

The memory architectures could not be more different. The Radeon 610M shares system memory, with bandwidth explicitly listed as "System Dependent." The GTX 760M, however, carries 2 GB of dedicated GDDR5 memory across a 128-bit bus, delivering 64.13 GB/s of fixed bandwidth. This fundamental difference affects both performance consistency and power draw, with the GTX 760M consuming 55 W TDP against the Radeon's 15 W TDP—a 40 W gap that reflects the discrete versus integrated nature of these designs.

Specification Differences

The specification sheets for these two GPUs diverge across nearly every measurable field. The Radeon 610M operates with a 6 nm process node at TSMC, while the GTX 760M uses a 28 nm process at the same foundry—a two-generation process advantage for AMD. The die sizes reflect this: 100 mm² for the Radeon versus 221 mm² for the GTX 760M, with the latter packing 2,540 million transistors at a density of 11.5 million per mm². Clock speeds favor the Radeon substantially: its 1500 MHz base and 1900 MHz boost clocks dwarf the GTX 760M's 628 MHz base and 719 MHz boost. The memory clock on the GTX 760M runs at 1002 MHz (4 Gbps effective), while the Radeon's memory is system shared.

The compute resources are starkly asymmetrical. The GTX 760M offers 768 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, versus the Radeon's 128 shading units, 8 TMUs, and 4 ROPs. This 6x difference in shading units and 8x difference in TMUs explains the GTX 760M's OpenCL lead. However, the Radeon counters with 2 ray tracing cores, which the GTX 760M lacks entirely. Pixel and texture rates follow the hardware counts: the GTX 760M produces 11.50 GPixel/s and 46.02 GTexel/s, while the Radeon manages 7.600 GPixel/s and 15.20 GTexel/s. FP32 performance favors the GTX 760M at 1,104.4 GFLOPS versus the Radeon's 486.4 GFLOPS, though the Radeon adds FP16 capability at 972.8 GFLOPS (2:1), a feature the GTX 760M does not list.

Power and interface specifications also differ. The Radeon 610M draws just 15 W TDP with no power connectors, while the GTX 760M consumes 55 W TDP, also without power connectors. The bus interfaces reflect their eras: PCIe 4.0 x8 for the Radeon versus PCIe 3.0 x16 for the GTX 760M. Memory configuration is perhaps the most consequential difference: the GTX 760M's 2 GB GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 64.13 GB/s bandwidth provides dedicated, predictable performance, whereas the Radeon's system-shared memory makes bandwidth entirely dependent on the host platform. Both GPUs are end-of-life, with the Radeon released in September 2022 and the GTX 760M in May 2013—a nine-year gap that explains the architectural gulf. The Radeon's predecessor is the Vega II IGP and successor the Navi III IGP, while the GTX 760M's lineage runs from GeForce 600M to GeForce 800M.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two benchmark results in the head-to-head comparison reveal opposing strengths that map directly to architectural priorities. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760M achieves 5,604 points against the AMD Radeon 610M's 4,535 points, a delta of -19.1% for the Radeon. This result aligns with the GTX 760M's massive hardware advantage in raw compute resources—768 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 16 ROPs versus 128, 8, and 4 respectively. The GTX 760M's FP32 throughput of 1,104.4 GFLOPS is more than double the Radeon's 486.4 GFLOPS, and its dedicated GDDR5 memory with 64.13 GB/s bandwidth avoids the system-dependent bottlenecks of shared memory. The OpenCL benchmark appears to reward this traditional compute-heavy design.

The Geekbench Vulkan test flips the script entirely. The AMD Radeon 610M scores 6,353 against the GTX 760M's 4,868, giving AMD a 30.5% victory. This dramatic reversal suggests that RDNA 2.0's modern architecture, with its DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4 support, extracts far better performance from the Vulkan API than Kepler's older design. The Radeon's higher clock speeds (1900 MHz boost versus 719 MHz) and the architectural efficiencies of RDNA 2.0 appear to overcome the GTX 760M's raw hardware count. The presence of 2 ray tracing cores in the Radeon, while not directly benchmarked here, indicates a more modern feature set that may influence driver optimization priorities.

The wins are split evenly at one apiece, but the magnitudes differ significantly. The GTX 760M's 19.1% OpenCL margin is substantial, yet the Radeon 610M's 30.5% Vulkan advantage is even larger. This asymmetry matters: the Radeon's bigger win comes in the more modern API, which is likely to see continued adoption and optimization. The GTX 760M's OpenCL dominance, while impressive, reflects a legacy compute paradigm. Average benchmark scores tell a similar story—the Radeon averages 5,444 across all tests, slightly ahead of the GTX 760M's 5,236, with percentile rankings of 32 and 31 respectively. The Radeon's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA Quadro M4000 (delta -0.4%) and AMD Radeon R7 M440 (delta -0.7%), while the GTX 760M sits near the NVIDIA Quadro 4000M (delta 0.5%) and AMD Radeon R7 M260X (delta 1.5%). These comparable neighboring scores underscore how closely matched these two GPUs are overall, despite their wildly different architectural approaches and eras.