AMD Radeon HD 6950 vs AMD Radeon R7 M445 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains one direct comparison between these two GPUs: the Geekbench OpenCL benchmark. In that test, the AMD Radeon HD 6950 scores 6210 points, while the AMD Radeon R7 M445 scores 5358 points. The delta works out to 15.9% in favor of the HD 6950, making it the clear winner in the only head-to-head test recorded. That is a meaningful margin, not a rounding error. The HD 6950 is roughly one-sixth faster in raw compute throughput as measured by this workload.

Looking at the wider performance context, the HD 6950 sits at the 36th percentile among all GPUs in the database, while the R7 M445 sits at the 31st percentile. That five-point gap in percentile ranking reinforces the head-to-head result: the older desktop card is not just marginally ahead, it is positioned noticeably higher in the overall performance distribution. The HD 6950's average benchmark score of 6210 places it just 0.2% behind the AMD FirePro W600 (6223) and 0.9% behind the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 (6270). For a card released in late 2010, that is a surprisingly competitive standing against much newer hardware in this specific OpenCL test.

The R7 M445, by contrast, lands within a tight cluster of mobile and entry-level parts. It sits 0.2% behind the Intel UHD Graphics P630 (5370), 0.7% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce 840M (5322), 0.8% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce 930A (5317), and 0.9% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M (5308). The R7 M445 is essentially in the same performance band as those rivals, which suggests it is a modest performer even within its own generation. The 15.9% delta between the two cards in question is far larger than any of the gaps between the R7 M445 and its nearest rivals, confirming that the HD 6950 occupies a clearly higher performance tier.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher OpenCL score?

A: The AMD Radeon HD 6950 scores 6210 points, which is 15.9% higher than the AMD Radeon R7 M445's 5358 points.

Q: How does the HD 6950 compare to its closest rivals?

A: The HD 6950 is 0.2% behind the AMD FirePro W600 (6223), 0.9% behind the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 (6270), 0.9% behind the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti SUPER (6270), and 1.1% behind the NVIDIA Quadro K620 (6282). It is the lowest scorer in its immediate rival group.

Q: How does the R7 M445 compare to its closest rivals?

A: The R7 M445 sits 0.2% behind the Intel UHD Graphics P630 (5370), but 0.7% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce 840M (5322), 0.8% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce 930A (5317), and 0.9% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M (5308). It is mid-pack within its rival group.

Q: What are the percentile rankings of these two GPUs?

A: The HD 6950 is at the 36th percentile among all GPUs, while the R7 M445 is at the 31st percentile. The HD 6950 is ranked higher overall.

Q: Which card supports newer graphics APIs?

A: The R7 M445 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The HD 6950 only supports DirectX 11.2 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.4, with no Vulkan support listed.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference?

A: The HD 6950 has 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 160.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The R7 M445 has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 64-bit bus, delivering only 32.00 GB/s of bandwidth.

The Verdict

The data points to a straightforward split. The AMD Radeon HD 6950 is the stronger performer in raw compute, with a 15.9% lead in the only benchmark recorded. It also carries a higher percentile ranking (36th vs 31st) and delivers substantially more memory bandwidth, pixel throughput, and texture throughput. If the workload is compute-heavy and does not require modern API features, the HD 6950 is the better choice. Its 2.253 TFLOPS of FP32 performance dwarfs the R7 M445's 588.8 GFLOPS, a nearly 4x gap that shows up clearly in the OpenCL result.

The AMD Radeon R7 M445, however, is not without its own advantages. It supports DirectX 12, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170, while the HD 6950 is stuck at DirectX 11.2 and OpenGL 4.4 with no Vulkan support. For modern titles or applications that rely on these newer APIs, the R7 M445 is the only one of the two that will work at all. It also has twice the memory capacity (4 GB vs 2 GB), which can matter for larger textures or datasets, even if the 64-bit bus severely limits how fast that memory can be accessed.

The R7 M445 is also a mobile part, built for portability with an IGP slot width and no power connectors, whereas the HD 6950 is a dual-slot desktop card requiring 2x 6-pin power connectors and a 550 W power supply. The HD 6950's 200 W TDP is a real consideration for system builders, while the R7 M445 has no listed TDP, reflecting its low-power mobile design. In short: pick the HD 6950 for raw performance on older APIs, pick the R7 M445 for modern API support and mobile integration.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every measured specification. The HD 6950 uses a 40 nm process node, while the R7 M445 uses a 28 nm node. The HD 6950 packs 2,640 million transistors on a 389 mm² die, while the R7 M445 has 1,550 million transistors on a 125 mm² die. Transistor density favors the newer part: 12.4M per mm² for the R7 M445 versus 6.8M per mm² for the HD 6950.

Clock speeds are listed only for the R7 M445, with a base clock of 780 MHz and a boost clock of 920 MHz. The HD 6950 has no base or boost clock listed, but its memory runs at 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective), while the R7 M445's memory runs at 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective).

Memory configurations diverge sharply. The HD 6950 has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 160.0 GB/s bandwidth. The R7 M445 has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 64-bit bus with only 32.00 GB/s bandwidth. That is a 5x difference in bandwidth, which explains why the older card can outperform the newer one in memory-bound workloads.

The compute units tell a similar story. The HD 6950 has 1408 shading units, 88 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The R7 M445 has 320 shading units, 20 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. Pixel rate is 25.60 GPixel/s for the HD 6950 versus 7.360 GPixel/s for the R7 M445. Texture rate is 70.40 GTexel/s versus 18.40 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 2.253 TFLOPS versus 588.8 GFLOPS. The R7 M445 does list FP16 performance at 588.8 GFLOPS (1:1), while the HD 6950 has no FP16 listing.

The bus interface also differs: PCIe 2.0 x16 for the HD 6950, PCIe 3.0 x8 for the R7 M445. Physical dimensions are only available for the HD 6950: 286 mm long, 126 mm tall, 42 mm wide. The R7 M445 has no listed dimensions, consistent with its IGP classification.

Architecture Differences

The HD 6950 is built on TeraScale 3 architecture, part of the Northern Islands generation (HD 6900 family), using the Cayman chip. The R7 M445 uses GCN 3.0 architecture, part of the Gem System (R7 M400) generation, using the Meso chip. These are fundamentally different designs from different eras, which explains the API support gap.

The HD 6950's TeraScale 3 architecture is an older design that maxes out at DirectX 11.2 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.4. It has no Vulkan support listed. The R7 M445's GCN 3.0 architecture supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. This is the single most important architectural difference for modern software compatibility.

The process node difference is also significant: 40 nm for the HD 6950 versus 28 nm for the R7 M445. The newer node allows the R7 M445 to pack more transistors per square millimeter (12.4M vs 6.8M), but the HD 6950 still has more total transistors (2,640 million vs 1,550 million) and a much larger die (389 mm² vs 125 mm²).

The R7 M445 supports FP16 compute at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, while the HD 6950 has no FP16 listing. This makes the R7 M445 more suitable for workloads that use half-precision arithmetic, even though its absolute FP32 performance is far lower.

The HD 6950's display outputs include 2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, and 2x mini-DisplayPort 1.2. The R7 M445's display outputs are listed as "Portable Device Dependent," reflecting its role as a mobile graphics solution rather than a standalone desktop card.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon HD 6950 wins in every raw performance metric recorded in the database. It is 15.9% ahead in the OpenCL benchmark, has a higher percentile ranking, delivers 5x more memory bandwidth, 5x more pixel throughput, nearly 4x more texture throughput, and roughly 3.8x more FP32 compute. It is the clear choice for any workload that does not depend on modern graphics APIs. Legacy DirectX 11 titles, OpenGL 4.4 applications, and compute tasks that rely on raw throughput will all favor the HD 6950.

The AMD Radeon R7 M445 wins where compatibility and efficiency matter. It supports DirectX 12, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170, making it the only option for modern games or applications that require these APIs. Its 4 GB memory capacity doubles the HD 6950's 2 GB, which can be beneficial for larger texture sets or data buffers, even if the narrow 64-bit bus limits effective use of that capacity. As an IGP with no power connectors and no listed TDP, it is also the only viable choice for thin-and-light laptops or compact systems where a dual-slot 200 W desktop card simply cannot fit.

The use-case split is clean: desktop builders with room for a large card and a 550 W power supply should take the HD 6950 for its substantial performance lead. Anyone needing modern API support, mobile form factor, or lower power draw should take the R7 M445, accepting its lower performance as the trade-off for compatibility and portability.