AMD Radeon 760M vs AMD Radeon R5 M240 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only directly comparable benchmark in the database is Geekbench OpenCL, and the result is decisive. The AMD Radeon 760M scores 20,255 points, while the AMD Radeon R5 M240 scores 6,975 points. That puts the 760M ahead by 65.6%, a massive gap that reflects the generational chasm between these two parts.

To put the R5 M240's score in context, it sits at the 39th percentile of all GPUs in the database, with nearest rivals including the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M at 6,946 points, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M at 7,023 points, and the NVIDIA T600 at 7,035 points. The R5 M240 edges out the GTX 675M by 0.4% and the AMD FirePro M5100 by 2.1%, but trails the GTX 680M by 0.7% and the T600 by 0.8%. In other words, this is a tightly packed cluster of older mobile parts, and the R5 M240 is right in the middle of it.

The Radeon 760M, by contrast, sits at the 35th percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 6,019 across all tests. Its nearest rivals in the database include the AMD Radeon RX 6400 at 6,001 points, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770M at 6,000 points, and the NVIDIA Quadro P2000 at 6,049 points. The 760M trails the Quadro P2000 by 0.5% but leads the RX 6400 and GTX 770M by 0.3% each. Interestingly, the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server also appears at 5,996 points, only 0.4% behind the 760M, which shows how the integrated GPU's score clusters with a wide range of discrete parts.

The single head-to-head result tells the story clearly: the 760M wins the only shared benchmark, and it wins by a wide margin. The R5 M240 has zero wins in the head-to-head comparison, while the 760M has one. That is not a close contest by any measure.

Architecture Differences

The R5 M240 is built on GCN 1.0 architecture, using the Jet chip, and belongs to the Gem System generation within the R5 M200 family. It is fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC, with 690 million transistors packed into a 56 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 12.3 million per square millimeter. This is an old design, released in September 2014, and it is now marked as end-of-life.

The Radeon 760M is an entirely different beast. It uses RDNA 3.0 architecture, built on the Phoenix chip, and belongs to the Navi III IGP generation. The manufacturing process has shrunk to 4 nm at TSMC, and the die contains an enormous 25,390 million transistors across 178 mm², yielding a density of 142.6 million transistors per square millimeter. That is more than 11 times the transistor density of the older part. The 760M was released in January 2024 and remains an active product.

The compute resources differ substantially. The R5 M240 has 320 shading units, 20 texture mapping units, and 8 raster operation units. The 760M has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The newer part also brings 8 ray tracing cores, which the R5 M240 lacks entirely. The 760M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (feature level 12_2), while the R5 M240 only reaches DirectX 12 (feature level 11_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6, but the Vulkan support differs: the R5 M240 supports Vulkan 1.2.170, while the 760M supports Vulkan 1.4.

Clock speeds tell a story of efficiency versus brute force. The R5 M240 runs at a 1000 MHz base and 1030 MHz boost, with memory clocked at 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective). The 760M has a lower base clock of 800 MHz but boosts to 2599 MHz, a much higher ceiling. The 760M's pixel rate is 41.58 GPixel/s versus 8.240 GPixel/s for the R5 M240, and its texture rate is 83.17 GTexel/s versus 20.60 GTexel/s. In raw FP32 compute, the 760M delivers 5.323 TFLOPS while the R5 M240 manages only 659.2 GFLOPS. The 760M also offers FP16 at the same 5.323 TFLOPS rate (1:1), while the R5 M240 has no listed FP16 performance.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in the shared Geekbench OpenCL test?

A: The AMD Radeon 760M scores 20,255 points versus 6,975 points for the AMD Radeon R5 M240, a 65.6% advantage for the 760M.

Q: How does the R5 M240 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The R5 M240 sits at the 39th percentile of all GPUs. It beats the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M by 0.4% and the AMD FirePro M5100 by 2.1%, but trails the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M by 0.7% and the NVIDIA T600 by 0.8%.

Q: What is the transistor count difference between these two GPUs?

A: The Radeon 760M contains 25,390 million transistors, while the Radeon R5 M240 contains only 690 million. The 760M also packs them far denser at 142.6 million per mm² versus 12.3 million per mm² for the older part.

Q: Does the Radeon 760M support ray tracing?

A: Yes, the 760M has 8 ray tracing cores. The R5 M240 has no ray tracing cores at all, and its DirectX support is limited to feature level 11_1, not the 12_2 Ultimate level of the 760M.

Q: What memory configurations do these GPUs use?

A: The R5 M240 has 1024 MB of dedicated DDR3 memory on a 64-bit bus, delivering 14.40 GB/s of bandwidth. The 760M uses system shared memory with a system-dependent bandwidth figure, and its memory type and bus width are also system shared.

Q: What is the power profile of each GPU?

A: The R5 M240 has no listed TDP in the database. The 760M has a 15 W TDP, uses no power connectors, and is classified as an integrated GPU (IGP) with motherboard-dependent display outputs.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon R5 M240 | AMD Radeon 760M |

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

| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | RDNA 3.0 |

| Chip | Jet | Phoenix |

| Generation | Gem System (R5 M200) | Navi III IGP (Phoenix) |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 4 nm |

| Transistors | 690 million | 25,390 million |

| Die Size | 56 mm² | 178 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 12.3M / mm² | 142.6M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1000 MHz | 800 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1030 MHz | 2599 MHz |

| Memory Size | 1024 MB | System Shared |

| Memory Type | DDR3 | System Shared |

| Bus Width | 64 bit | System Shared |

| Bandwidth | 14.40 GB/s | System Dependent |

| Shading Units | 320 | 512 |

| TMUs | 20 | 32 |

| ROPs | 8 | 16 |

| RT Cores | None | 8 |

| Pixel Rate | 8.240 GPixel/s | 41.58 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 20.60 GTexel/s | 83.17 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 659.2 GFLOPS | 5.323 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | Not listed | 5.323 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | Not listed | 15 W |

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

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

| Vulkan | 1.2.170 | 1.4 |

| Production Status | End-of-life | Active |

| Release Date | September 2014 | January 2024 |

| Predecessor | Solar System | Navi II IGP |

| Successor | Polaris Mobile | None listed |

Where Each One Wins

The Radeon 760M wins the only direct benchmark comparison, and it wins across every architectural category that matters for modern workloads. It has more shading units, more TMUs, more ROPs, ray tracing support, a higher boost clock, and vastly higher pixel, texture, and FP32 rates. The 760M also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4, making it the clear choice for newer games and compute workloads that use modern APIs.

The R5 M240 does have some advantages, though they are narrow. It has dedicated 1024 MB of DDR3 memory with a fixed 14.40 GB/s bandwidth, which can be more predictable than system-shared memory whose performance depends on the host platform. It also has a higher base clock of 1000 MHz versus 800 MHz, though the 760M more than compensates with its 2599 MHz boost. The R5 M240's PCIe 3.0 x8 interface is older but the 760M's PCIe 4.0 x8 only matters if the rest of the system supports it. In the database, the R5 M240's percentile rank of 39 is actually higher than the 760M's 35, but that is an artifact of the 760M being averaged across many tests, including some very low DirectX 9 and DirectX 10 scores, while the R5 M240 has only a single OpenCL benchmark recorded.

The 760M also shows strength in specific workloads. Its Passmark G3D score is 5,310, and its Geekbench Vulkan score is 30,336. The R5 M240 has no equivalent Vulkan or Passmark results in the database, so the comparison is incomplete, but the available data all points in one direction.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the AMD Radeon 760M is the superior GPU for essentially every use case. Its 65.6% lead in the shared OpenCL benchmark is backed by a generational leap in architecture, process node, and feature support. Anyone looking for a GPU that can handle modern DirectX 12 Ultimate titles, ray tracing workloads, or general compute acceleration should choose the 760M without hesitation.

The R5 M240 is an end-of-life part from 2014, built on GCN 1.0 with a 28 nm process. It competes with mobile GPUs from the same era, like the GTX 675M and GTX 680M, and it does so respectably. But against the 760M, it is outclassed in every measurable way. The only scenario where the R5 M240 makes sense is a legacy system that already has it installed and cannot be upgraded, or a use case that specifically requires dedicated DDR3 memory rather than system-shared memory. For anyone choosing between these two today, the Radeon 760M is the only rational pick.