AMD Radeon 880M vs AMD Radeon R9 M275X Comparison

AMD Radeon R9 M275X and AMD Radeon 880M represent two very different moments in AMD’s mobile graphics lineup. The R9 M275X is a discrete part from the GCN 1.0 era, while the 880M is a modern integrated graphics processor built on RDNA 3.5. The database shows a clear generational gap, but the details matter for anyone choosing between older discrete hardware and newer integrated silicon. This analysis walks through the recorded benchmark results, specification differences, and architectural shifts using only the data available.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains two direct head-to-head comparisons between these GPUs: Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan. In both tests, the AMD Radeon 880M wins decisively. The OpenCL result shows the 880M scoring 31,285 against the R9 M275X’s 11,200. That is a delta of -64.2 percent when viewed from the R9 M275X’s perspective, meaning the older card trails by roughly two-thirds of its own score. Translating the delta into a ratio, the 880M delivers about 2.79 times the OpenCL performance of the R9 M275X. The Vulkan test is even more lopsided: the 880M records 40,006, while the R9 M275X manages 9,964. The delta here is -75.1 percent, so the R9 M275X is left with less than a quarter of the 880M’s Vulkan output. Expressed as a multiplier, the 880M is roughly 4.01 times faster in Vulkan.

These are not narrow margins. The R9 M275X’s average benchmark score across all recorded tests sits at 10,582, and its percentile ranking against all GPUs is 49. The 880M’s average score is 8,436, with a percentile of 43. That is an unusual situation: the 880M wins every head-to-head test yet has a lower average score and percentile. The reason is straightforward from the data. The 880M’s benchmark list includes several low-scoring Passmark entries, such as 31 in DirectX 10, 32 in DirectX 12, and 73 in DirectX 11. The R9 M275X only has two recorded benchmarks, both Geekbench tests, which pull its average upward. So the average and percentile fields reflect test suite composition, not raw capability. When both GPUs are measured on the same two workloads, the 880M is ahead by a wide margin in every case.

For context, the R9 M275X’s nearest rivals in the database include the AMD Radeon RX 6600S with an average score of 10,629 and a delta of -0.4 percent, meaning the R9 M275X is essentially tied with that part. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti scores 10,690, putting it 1 percent above the R9 M275X. The AMD Radeon RX 550X is 1 percent slower, and the NVIDIA Quadro K2200 is 1.7 percent faster. These small deltas show the R9 M275X sits in a tight cluster of mid-2010s performance levels. The 880M, by contrast, has nearest rivals like the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX (average 8,427, delta 0.1 percent) and the NVIDIA GeForce MX330 (average 8,458, delta -0.3 percent). The 880M’s average is within a rounding error of those parts, despite its much higher peak scores in Geekbench.

The head-to-head results are unambiguous. If a workload uses OpenCL or Vulkan, the 880M is the clear choice. The R9 M275X does not win a single recorded benchmark against the 880M; the wins column shows 0 for the R9 M275X and 2 for the 880M.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Radeon 880M boosts to 2900 MHz, while the AMD Radeon R9 M275X boosts to 925 MHz. The 880M’s base clock is 400 MHz, lower than the R9 M275X’s 900 MHz base, but the boost ceiling is over three times higher.

Q: Does the R9 M275X support Vulkan?

A: Yes. The R9 M275X lists Vulkan 1.2.170 in its API support. The 880M lists Vulkan 1.4, a newer revision, but both are functional for Vulkan workloads.

Q: How much memory does the 880M have?

A: The 880M uses system shared memory. Its memory size, type, bus width, and bandwidth are all listed as “System Shared” or “System Dependent,” meaning they vary with the host device’s installed RAM and configuration. The R9 M275X has 2 GB of dedicated GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus with 72.00 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What is the transistor count difference?

A: The R9 M275X uses 1,500 million transistors on a 123 mm² die. The 880M uses 34,000 million transistors on a 233 mm² die. That is over 22 times more transistors in the 880M, packed into roughly double the die area.

Q: Is the 880M an integrated or discrete GPU?

A: The 880M is an IGP, meaning integrated graphics processor. Its slot width is listed as “IGP,” its power connectors are “None,” and its TDP is 15 W. The R9 M275X is a discrete chip with a PCIe 3.0 x16 interface, and no TDP is recorded for it.

Q: Which GPU scores higher in Geekbench Vulkan?

A: The 880M scores 40,006, while the R9 M275X scores 9,964. The 880M is about four times faster in this test, with a delta of -75.1 percent from the R9 M275X’s perspective.

The Verdict

The data points to one conclusion for anyone comparing these two directly: the AMD Radeon 880M is the stronger GPU in every recorded head-to-head benchmark. OpenCL and Vulkan both show the 880M leading by margins that range from roughly 2.8x to 4.0x. The R9 M275X’s higher average benchmark score and better percentile are artifacts of having only two Geekbench tests recorded, neither of which reflects its performance in the 880M’s broader test set. The 880M’s Passmark scores, while individually low, cover a wider range of workloads including DirectX 9, 10, 11, 12, 2D, and compute. The R9 M275X has no Passmark records at all.

For a user prioritizing raw compute in modern APIs, the 880M is the only reasonable pick. Its Vulkan score of 40,006 is more than four times the R9 M275X’s 9,964. Its OpenCL score of 31,285 is nearly three times the R9 M275X’s 11,200. The R9 M275X offers dedicated memory, which can be an advantage in specific scenarios where shared memory contention is a concern, but the benchmark results do not show any test where that translates into a win. The R9 M275X is end-of-life, while the 880M is active production. The 880M also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), compared to the R9 M275X’s DirectX 12 (11_1), which means newer feature-level support. The verdict from the recorded data is clear: choose the 880M unless a very specific legacy workload requires the R9 M275X’s dedicated VRAM, and even then, no benchmark in the database demonstrates a performance advantage for the older card.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every specification field. The R9 M275X uses a 28 nm process node, while the 880M uses 4 nm. The R9 M275X has a die size of 123 mm² and 1,500 million transistors, giving a transistor density of 12.2M per mm². The 880M has a 233 mm² die with 34,000 million transistors, a density of 145.9M per mm². Clock speeds diverge sharply: the R9 M275X runs at 900 MHz base and 925 MHz boost, while the 880M runs at 400 MHz base and 2900 MHz boost. Memory is another major split. The R9 M275X has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 72.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The 880M uses system shared memory with bandwidth listed as system dependent.

The R9 M275X has 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The 880M has 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. Pixel rate and texture rate reflect the architectural gap: the R9 M275X outputs 14.80 GPixel/s and 37.00 GTexel/s, while the 880M outputs 46.40 GPixel/s and 139.2 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is listed at 1,184.0 GFLOPS for the R9 M275X and 4.454 TFLOPS for the 880M. The 880M also lists FP16 at 4.454 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, while the R9 M275X has no FP16 entry. The 880M includes 12 ray tracing cores; the R9 M275X has none.

Bus interface differs as well: the R9 M275X uses PCIe 3.0 x16, the 880M uses PCIe 4.0 x8. API support shows the 880M ahead on DirectX (12 Ultimate vs. 12 11_1) and Vulkan (1.4 vs. 1.2.170), while both support OpenGL 4.6. Power characteristics are only recorded for the 880M: 15 W TDP, IGP slot width, and no power connectors. The R9 M275X has no TDP or slot width listed. Release dates are far apart: the R9 M275X launched on January 27, 2014, and the 880M on July 14, 2024. Production status is end-of-life for the R9 M275X and active for the 880M. The R9 M275X’s predecessor is listed as Solar System and successor as Polaris Mobile; the 880M’s predecessor is Navi II IGP with no successor recorded.

Architecture Differences

The R9 M275X is built on the Venus chip using GCN 1.0 architecture, part of the Gem System (R9 M200) generation. The 880M uses the Strix Point chip with RDNA 3.5 architecture, part of the Navi III IGP (Strix Point Mobile) generation. GCN 1.0 was AMD’s first iteration of the Graphics Core Next design, and the R9 M275X reflects that early 2010s approach with a relatively simple compute layout. RDNA 3.5 is a much newer design that introduces a different shader organization, hardware ray tracing cores, and a unified FP32/FP16 pipeline.

The transistor data highlights the architectural leap. GCN 1.0 on 28 nm packed 1,500 million transistors into 123 mm². RDNA 3.5 on 4 nm packs 34,000 million transistors into 233 mm². The density increase from 12.2M to 145.9M transistors per mm² is a factor of roughly 12, enabled by the smaller process node. The 880M’s 12 ray tracing cores are a feature class that did not exist in the R9 M275X’s generation; the older GPU has no ray tracing support at all. The 880M’s 1:1 FP16 ratio indicates it can process half-precision and single-precision at the same rate, while the R9 M275X has no FP16 capability recorded.

The 880M’s base clock of 400 MHz is unusually low, likely a power-saving measure for an integrated part with a 15 W TDP. Its boost clock of 2900 MHz is over three times the R9 M275X’s boost, and the texture rate of 139.2 GTexel/s versus 37.00 GTexel/s shows the newer architecture can issue far more texture operations per second despite having only eight additional TMUs. The pixel rate of 46.40 GPixel/s versus 14.80 GPixel/s is similarly driven by the higher boost clock and architectural efficiency. The 880M’s system shared memory, while variable, is paired with a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface, which provides more bandwidth than the R9 M275X’s PCIe 3.0 x16 for CPU-GPU transfers, though the R9 M275X’s dedicated GDDR5 avoids sharing latency.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data gives the 880M a clean sweep: it wins both Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan. There are no recorded tests where the R9 M275X comes out ahead. The 880M’s strength is in modern compute-heavy workloads, particularly those that leverage Vulkan, where its score of 40,006 is four times the R9 M275X’s 9,964. OpenCL also favors the 880M at 31,285 versus 11,200. The 880M’s DirectX 12 Ultimate support and ray tracing cores position it for current-generation gaming and compute APIs, though no direct gaming benchmarks are in the database.

The R9 M275X’s advantages are indirect and not reflected in any winning benchmark. It has dedicated 2 GB GDDR5 memory with a fixed 72.00 GB/s bandwidth, which can be beneficial in scenarios where shared memory bandwidth is constrained by the host system. Its PCIe 3.0 x16 interface offers more lanes than the 880M’s PCIe 4.0 x8, though the newer standard’s higher per-lane throughput may offset that. The R9 M275X also has a higher base clock (900 MHz vs. 400 MHz), which could help in lightly loaded tasks that do not trigger boost states, but again, no benchmark in the database confirms this.

For practical use cases, the 880M is the better choice for any application that uses OpenCL or Vulkan. Its FP32 compute of 4.454 TFLOPS is over 3.7 times the R9 M275X’s 1,184.0 GFLOPS, and its texture and pixel rates are multiples of the older GPU’s. The R9 M275X might be preferred in a system where dedicated VRAM is mandatory and the shared memory model of the 880M is unacceptable, but that is a system-level constraint, not a performance win. The recorded data shows the 880M winning every comparison where both GPUs were tested under identical conditions, and the specification sheet reinforces that lead across clocks, compute, and feature support.