AMD Radeon 760M vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M Comparison
AMD Radeon 760M
GeForce GTX 765M
PERFORMANCE BENCHMARKS
Analysis: AMD Radeon 760M vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M
FAQ
Q: How does the AMD Radeon 760M compare to the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M in overall average benchmark score?
A: The AMD Radeon 760M records an average benchmark score of 6019, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M sits at 5501. This places the AMD part in the 35th percentile of all GPUs, versus the 32nd percentile for the NVIDIA part.
Q: What is the most significant performance gap between the two in shared tests?
A: In the Geekbench Vulkan test, the AMD Radeon 760M scores 30336 against 6714 for the GTX 765M, a delta of 351.8%. In Geekbench OpenCL, the AMD part scores 20255 versus 7176, a delta of 182.3%.
Q: Which GPU has more shading units and texture mapping units?
A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M has 768 shading units and 64 TMUs, while the AMD Radeon 760M has 512 shading units and 32 TMUs. However, the AMD part has 8 ray tracing cores, which the NVIDIA part lacks entirely.
Q: What are the process node and transistor differences?
A: The AMD Radeon 760M is built on a 4 nm process at TSMC with 25,390 million transistors on a 178 mm² die. The GTX 765M uses TSMC's 28 nm process with 2,540 million transistors on a 221 mm² die. Transistor density is 142.6M per mm² for AMD versus 11.5M per mm² for NVIDIA.
Q: What is the difference in power draw?
A: The AMD Radeon 760M has a TDP of 15 W, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M is rated at 75 W. The AMD part is an integrated GPU (IGP) with no power connectors, whereas the NVIDIA part is an MXM module.
Q: Which GPU supports newer API features?
A: The AMD Radeon 760M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), Vulkan 1.4, and OpenGL 4.6. The GTX 765M supports DirectX 12 (11_0), Vulkan 1.2.175, and OpenGL 4.6. The AMD part also includes hardware ray tracing support.
The Verdict
The data points in one direction: the AMD Radeon 760M is the stronger performer in every recorded head-to-head benchmark. Its average score of 6019 exceeds the GTX 765M's 5501 by roughly 9.4%. The AMD part wins both shared tests, with a 182.3% lead in OpenCL and a 351.8% lead in Vulkan.
For users choosing between these two, the decision hinges on platform and workload. The AMD Radeon 760M is a current, active IGP (integrated graphics processor) with a 4 nm process, 15 W TDP, and ray tracing cores. It fits into modern AMD Phoenix-based laptops or handhelds. The GTX 765M is an end-of-life MXM module from 2013, drawing 75 W, and is only relevant for older portable devices with MXM slots. If the system can accept the AMD part, the benchmark data strongly favors it. If the system is locked to MXM, the GTX 765M remains the only option, but its performance class is measurably lower.
Architecture Differences
The architectural gap is generational. The AMD Radeon 760M is built on RDNA 3.0, part of the Navi III IGP (Phoenix) generation, using a 4 nm process at TSMC. It packs 25,390 million transistors into a 178 mm² die, yielding a density of 142.6M transistors per mm². The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M uses the Kepler architecture, from the GeForce 700M generation, on a 28 nm process. It contains 2,540 million transistors across a 221 mm² die, with a density of just 11.5M per mm².
The AMD chip includes 8 ray tracing cores, a feature entirely absent from the GTX 765M. This makes the AMD part capable of hardware-accelerated ray tracing, while the NVIDIA part relies on older rasterization techniques. The AMD part also reports FP16 performance at 5.323 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio), whereas the GTX 765M has no recorded FP16 capability. Both have 16 ROPs, but the AMD part's pixel rate of 41.58 GPixel/s far exceeds the GTX 765M's 13.81 GPixel/s, and its texture rate of 83.17 GTexel/s beats the NVIDIA part's 55.23 GTexel/s.
Specification Differences
The two parts differ across nearly every specification field. The AMD Radeon 760M operates with a base clock of 800 MHz and a boost clock of 2599 MHz, while the GTX 765M runs at 797 MHz base and 863 MHz boost. Memory is a major divergence: the AMD part uses system shared memory with a system-dependent bandwidth, whereas the GTX 765M has 2 GB of dedicated GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 64.13 GB/s.
Compute resources differ as well. The GTX 765M has more shading units (768 vs. 512) and more TMUs (64 vs. 32), but the AMD part's higher clocks and newer architecture produce far higher throughput. FP32 performance is 5.323 TFLOPS for the AMD part versus 1,325.6 GFLOPS for the NVIDIA part. The AMD part is a 15 W IGP with PCIe 4.0 x8 interface and motherboard-dependent display outputs. The GTX 765M is a 75 W MXM module with MXM-B (3.0) interface and portable device dependent outputs. Production status differs: AMD is active, NVIDIA is end-of-life. The AMD part released on 2024-01-30, the NVIDIA part on 2013-05-29.
Where Each One Wins
The AMD Radeon 760M wins in every measured benchmark category. In the head-to-head tests, it dominates both OpenCL and Vulkan workloads. Its average benchmark score of 6019 places it near the AMD Radeon RX 6400 (6001, delta 0.3%) and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770M (6000, delta 0.3%). This means the AMD part performs on par with discrete graphics cards from a higher tier, despite being an IGP.
The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M wins in none of the shared tests. Its average score of 5501 aligns it with the NVIDIA GeForce MX130 (5508, delta -0.1%) and AMD Radeon R7 M440 (5483, delta 0.3%). The GTX 765M's only unique benchmark result is Geekbench Metal, where it scores 2612, but the AMD part has no Metal result in the database. For raw compute in OpenCL and Vulkan, the AMD part is categorically faster. The GTX 765M's advantage, if any, lies solely in being a dedicated memory solution with its own 2 GB GDDR5, which may matter in systems where shared memory bandwidth is constrained.
Head-to-Head Benchmarks
The database records two shared benchmark tests between these GPUs, and the AMD Radeon 760M wins both decisively.
In Geekbench OpenCL, the AMD Radeon 760M scores 20255 against the GTX 765M's 7176. This is a delta of 182.3%, meaning the AMD part is nearly three times faster in this compute workload. The gap reflects the architectural leap: the AMD part's FP32 throughput of 5.323 TFLOPS dwarfs the GTX 765M's 1,325.6 GFLOPS. Even with fewer shading units (512 vs. 768), the AMD part's higher clock speeds and RDNA 3.0 efficiency produce far more work per cycle.
In Geekbench Vulkan, the result is even more lopsided. The AMD Radeon 760M scores 30336, while the GTX 765M manages 6714, a delta of 351.8%. This test benefits from the AMD part's modern API support (Vulkan 1.4 vs. 1.2.175) and its ray tracing hardware, which the NVIDIA part lacks. The AMD part's score here is more than 4.5 times higher, indicating that the GTX 765M's Kepler architecture is simply outclassed in modern graphics API workloads.
Beyond the head-to-head, the AMD part's other benchmark results reinforce its position. It scores 400 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, 5310 in Passmark G3D, and 2840 in Passmark GPU Compute. These are not directly compared to the GTX 765M, which only has Geekbench results, but they contribute to the AMD part's higher average score of 6019 versus 5501. The AMD part's percentile ranking of 35 versus 32 for the NVIDIA part confirms that, across the entire GPU landscape, the AMD IGP sits in a slightly higher performance tier. The data is unambiguous: the AMD Radeon 760M outperforms the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M in every measurable shared metric.