AMD Radeon HD 6950 vs AMD Radeon R5 M240 Comparison

The Verdict

The benchmark data presents a clear, if somewhat counterintuitive, outcome: the AMD Radeon R5 M240, a mobile part from 2014, holds a 12.3% performance advantage over the AMD Radeon HD 6950 in the recorded Geekbench OpenCL test. The R5 M240 scores 6975 points, while the HD 6950 scores 6210 points. The R5 M240 also sits at the 39th percentile of all GPUs in the database, compared to the HD 6950’s 36th percentile, reinforcing its higher standing in this specific workload.

For a user prioritizing compute performance in OpenCL-based tasks, the R5 M240 is the stronger choice based on this data. It delivers a higher raw score with significantly lower power demands, as its TDP is not listed in the database, whereas the HD 6950 draws 200 W and requires a 550 W suggested power supply plus two 6-pin connectors. The HD 6950, however, is a desktop card with a 256-bit memory bus, 2 GB of GDDR5 memory, and 160.0 GB/s of bandwidth, making it a more capable option for memory-intensive scenarios, even if the recorded compute score does not reflect that advantage.

The verdict from the data is straightforward: the R5 M240 wins the only head-to-head benchmark recorded. The HD 6950 does not win any. For a system builder with an existing high-wattage desktop platform, the HD 6950 might still appeal due to its older architecture and higher memory bandwidth, but the database shows the R5 M240 as the superior performer in the measured test.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs represent entirely different design philosophies from AMD. The R5 M240 uses the GCN 1.0 architecture on a 28 nm process at TSMC, built around the small Jet chip. It packs 690 million transistors onto a 56 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 12.3 million per mm². The HD 6950, by contrast, uses the older TeraScale 3 architecture on a 40 nm process, also at TSMC, featuring the much larger Cayman chip. It contains 2,640 million transistors across a 389 mm² die, with a lower density of 6.8 million per mm².

The compute resources differ dramatically. The R5 M240 has 320 shading units, 20 texture mapping units, and 8 ROPs. The HD 6950 has 1408 shading units, 88 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. This is a massive difference in raw execution resources, yet the R5 M240 still manages to outperform the HD 6950 in the recorded OpenCL benchmark. Clock speeds explain part of the story: the R5 M240 runs at a base clock of 1000 MHz with a boost of 1030 MHz, while the HD 6950’s core clocks are not listed in the database, though its memory clock is 1250 MHz with 5 Gbps effective.

Memory subsystems are entirely different. The R5 M240 uses 1024 MB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus, delivering 14.40 GB/s of bandwidth. The HD 6950 uses 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 160.0 GB/s. That is more than ten times the bandwidth, yet it does not translate into a benchmark win for the older card. API support also differs: the R5 M240 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170, while the HD 6950 supports DirectX 11.2 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.4, with no Vulkan support listed. The R5 M240 also uses PCIe 3.0 x8, whereas the HD 6950 uses PCIe 2.0 x16.

Where Each One Wins

The database records only one benchmark test, Geekbench OpenCL, and the R5 M240 wins it outright. There are no other test categories to split. Based on that single metric, the R5 M240 claims the compute performance crown. Its higher score, 6975 versus 6210, and its 12.3% delta make it the winner in the only measured discipline.

The HD 6950, while losing the compute test, has structural advantages that the benchmark does not capture. Its 160.0 GB/s memory bandwidth, 256-bit bus, and 2 GB VRAM make it better suited for high-resolution texture workloads or any task that saturates memory throughput. The R5 M240’s 14.40 GB/s bandwidth is a severe constraint in such scenarios. The HD 6950 also has a much higher pixel rate of 25.60 GPixel/s and texture rate of 70.40 GTexel/s, versus the R5 M240’s 8.240 GPixel/s and 20.60 GTexel/s. These figures suggest the HD 6950 would win in rasterization-heavy workloads, even though no such benchmark appears in the database.

The R5 M240 wins on efficiency and modern feature support. It has no listed TDP, meaning it likely draws far less power than the HD 6950’s 200 W, and it supports newer APIs including Vulkan, which the HD 6950 lacks entirely. For a mobile or low-power system, the R5 M240 is the only viable option between the two.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher Geekbench OpenCL score?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M240 scores 6975, which is 12.3% higher than the AMD Radeon HD 6950’s 6210.

Q: Does the HD 6950 have more memory bandwidth?

A: Yes. The HD 6950 has 160.0 GB/s of bandwidth from its 256-bit GDDR5 memory, while the R5 M240 has 14.40 GB/s from 64-bit DDR3.

Q: Which GPU supports Vulkan?

A: The R5 M240 supports Vulkan version 1.2.170. The HD 6950 has no Vulkan support listed in the database.

Q: What is the transistor count difference?

A: The HD 6950 has 2,640 million transistors on a 389 mm² die, while the R5 M240 has 690 million transistors on a 56 mm² die.

Q: How do the two compare in pixel rate?

A: The HD 6950 has a pixel rate of 25.60 GPixel/s, while the R5 M240 has 8.240 GPixel/s. The HD 6950 is roughly three times faster in this metric.

Q: Which card has a higher percentile ranking?

A: The R5 M240 is at the 39th percentile of all GPUs, while the HD 6950 is at the 36th percentile.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only head-to-head benchmark in the database is Geekbench OpenCL. The R5 M240 scores 6975, and the HD 6950 scores 6210. The delta is 12.3% in favor of the R5 M240. This is a decisive win, not a marginal one. The R5 M240 achieves this despite having only 320 shading units compared to the HD 6950’s 1408, and despite having a memory bandwidth of 14.40 GB/s versus 160.0 GB/s.

The R5 M240’s nearest rivals in the database include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M at 6946 (0.4% lower), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M at 7023 (0.7% higher), the NVIDIA T600 at 7035 (0.8% higher), and the AMD FirePro M5100 at 6830 (2.1% lower). The R5 M240 sits comfortably in this mobile and workstation GPU range. Its score is close to the GTX 680M and T600, which are both more recent or higher-tier parts, suggesting the R5 M240 punches above its class.

The HD 6950’s nearest rivals are a mixed group: the AMD FirePro W600 at 6223 (0.2% higher), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 at 6270 (0.9% higher), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti SUPER at 6270 (0.9% higher), and the NVIDIA Quadro K620 at 6282 (1.1% higher). The HD 6950 is within 1.1% of all these cards, which is remarkable for a 2010 desktop GPU. It is essentially tied with the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 and RTX 5070 Ti SUPER in this OpenCL test, according to the data. That places the HD 6950 in a strange position: it loses to the R5 M240 by 12.3% but matches much newer cards within a single percentage point.

The win tally is simple: the R5 M240 records 1 win, and the HD 6950 records 0. The data does not include any other benchmark categories, so this is the complete head-to-head picture.

Specification Differences

The R5 M240 and HD 6950 differ in nearly every physical and architectural specification. The R5 M240 uses a 28 nm process, while the HD 6950 uses a 40 nm process. Transistor counts are 690 million versus 2,640 million, and die sizes are 56 mm² versus 389 mm². Transistor density is 12.3 million per mm² for the R5 M240 and 6.8 million per mm² for the HD 6950.

Memory configurations are starkly different. The R5 M240 has 1024 MB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus with 14.40 GB/s bandwidth. The HD 6950 has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 160.0 GB/s bandwidth. Memory clocks are 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective) for the R5 M240 and 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective) for the HD 6950.

Compute units differ: the R5 M240 has 320 shading units, 20 TMUs, and 8 ROPs, while the HD 6950 has 1408 shading units, 88 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. Pixel rates are 8.240 GPixel/s versus 25.60 GPixel/s, and texture rates are 20.60 GTexel/s versus 70.40 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 659.2 GFLOPS versus 2.253 TFLOPS, a factor of roughly 3.4 in favor of the HD 6950.

Power and physical dimensions only appear for the HD 6950: 200 W TDP, dual-slot width, 2x 6-pin power connectors, 550 W suggested PSU, and dimensions of 286 mm length, 126 mm height, and 42 mm width. The R5 M240 has no listed TDP, slot width, or dimensions. Bus interfaces are PCIe 3.0 x8 for the R5 M240 and PCIe 2.0 x16 for the HD 6950. API support favors the R5 M240 with DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170, while the HD 6950 offers DirectX 11.2 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.4 with no Vulkan. The HD 6950’s display outputs are 2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, and 2x mini-DisplayPort 1.2; the R5 M240 has none listed. Release dates are 2014-09-17 for the R5 M240 and 2010-12-13 for the HD 6950. The HD 6950 has a launch MSRP of 299 USD.