AMD Radeon HD 8690M vs AMD Radeon R5 M240 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The single recorded benchmark in the database, Geekbench OpenCL, places the AMD Radeon R5 M240 and the AMD Radeon HD 8690M in a direct comparison. The R5 M240 scores 6975, while the HD 8690M scores 6137. This yields a 13.7% advantage for the R5 M240, making it the clear winner in this head-to-head matchup. The R5 M240’s victory is not a narrow one; a double-digit percentage lead in a compute-oriented workload like OpenCL indicates a meaningful performance gap in raw throughput.

Looking at the broader context, the R5 M240’s 6975 score places it at the 39th percentile among all GPUs in the database, while the HD 8690M’s 6137 score lands at the 36th percentile. That three-point percentile difference, while modest, reinforces the R5 M240’s slight edge in overall standing. The R5 M240’s nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M at 6946 (a 0.4% difference), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M at 7023 (a -0.7% difference), and the NVIDIA T600 at 7035 (a -0.8% difference). This clustering shows that the R5 M240 sits within a narrow band of performance around these desktop-class mobile GPUs, effectively trading blows with them. It is also 2.1% ahead of the AMD FirePro M5100, which scores 6830.

The HD 8690M, by contrast, finds its nearest rivals in a slightly lower performance tier. The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 scores 6117, a 0.3% difference from the HD 8690M, while the NVIDIA RTX A400 scores 6078 (1% difference) and the NVIDIA GeForce MX230 scores 6077 (1% difference). The HD 8690M is 1.2% behind the AMD Radeon HD 6950, which scores 6210. The data shows that the HD 8690M is competitive with integrated and entry-level discrete solutions, but it does not reach the performance plateau occupied by the R5 M240 and its rivals.

In the head-to-head benchmark, the R5 M240’s 13.7% lead is substantial enough to matter in real workloads. For OpenCL compute tasks, which stress shader throughput and memory bandwidth, the R5 M240’s higher clock speeds and faster memory contribute directly to this outcome. The HD 8690M, despite having double the memory capacity, cannot overcome the R5 M240’s other advantages in this specific test.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs are built on the same GCN 1.0 architecture and use the same 28 nm process node at TSMC. They also share identical transistor counts at 690 million and the same die size of 56 mm², resulting in a transistor density of 12.3M per mm². This means the fundamental silicon design is the same, and the differences come down to configuration and clock speeds rather than architectural innovation.

The R5 M240 uses the Jet chip, while the HD 8690M uses the Sun chip. Both are part of AMD’s mobile lineup, but they belong to different generations: the R5 M240 is from the Gem System (R5 M200) generation, while the HD 8690M is from the Solar System (HD 8600M) generation. The R5 M240’s predecessor is the Solar System, and its successor is Polaris Mobile. The HD 8690M’s predecessor is London, and its successor is Gem System. This places the R5 M240 one step ahead in the product cycle, with the HD 8690M being an earlier design.

The shading unit count is identical at 320, as are the texture mapping units at 20 and the raster output units at 8. This means the core compute layout is the same, and the performance differences must come from clock speeds and memory subsystem design. The R5 M240 operates at a base clock of 1000 MHz and a boost clock of 1030 MHz, while the HD 8690M runs at 925 MHz base and 975 MHz boost. The R5 M240’s higher clocks give it a 8.1% advantage in pixel rate (8.240 GPixel/s versus 7.800 GPixel/s) and a 5.6% advantage in texture rate (20.60 GTexel/s versus 19.50 GTexel/s). FP32 throughput follows the same pattern: 659.2 GFLOPS for the R5 M240 versus 624.0 GFLOPS for the HD 8690M, a 5.6% lead.

Memory is where the two diverge most sharply. The R5 M240 comes with 1024 MB of DDR3 memory on a 64-bit bus, running at 900 MHz with 1800 Mbps effective speed, yielding a bandwidth of 14.40 GB/s. The HD 8690M, in contrast, has 2048 MB of GDDR5 memory on the same 64-bit bus, running at 1000 MHz with 4 Gbps effective speed, delivering 32.00 GB/s. That is more than double the bandwidth for the HD 8690M. This is a significant architectural difference: GDDR5 is a much faster memory type than DDR3, and the higher effective speed compensates for the narrow bus width. The R5 M240’s lower bandwidth is a bottleneck, especially in memory-intensive workloads, but the OpenCL benchmark still favors it, suggesting that compute performance is more dependent on shader clock than on raw memory throughput.

Both GPUs support the same API set: DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. They also share the same PCIe 3.0 x8 bus interface. Neither has ray tracing cores or tensor cores, which is expected for GCN 1.0 architecture. The production status for both is end-of-life, and both lack a launch MSRP in the database.

The Verdict

From the recorded data, the AMD Radeon R5 M240 is the stronger performer. Its 6975 OpenCL score beats the HD 8690M’s 6137 by 13.7%, and it holds a higher percentile ranking at 39 versus 36. The R5 M240 also wins the only head-to-head benchmark in the database. For any user prioritizing compute performance, the R5 M240 is the clear choice based on these measurements.

However, the HD 8690M is not without merit. Its 2048 MB of GDDR5 memory provides 32.00 GB/s of bandwidth, which is 122% higher than the R5 M240’s 14.40 GB/s. In scenarios where memory capacity or bandwidth is the limiting factor, such as high-resolution textures or large data sets, the HD 8690M could offer a smoother experience. The database does not include a memory-bandwidth-specific benchmark, so this advantage is qualitative, but it is a real specification difference.

The R5 M240’s higher clocks and compute throughput make it the better all-rounder for OpenCL-style workloads, which are common in general-purpose GPU computing. The HD 8690M’s memory advantage may appeal to users who run applications that are bandwidth-bound rather than compute-bound. Given that the only recorded benchmark favors the R5 M240 decisively, the recommendation from the data is to pick the R5 M240 unless the specific workload demands more memory bandwidth or capacity.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two GPUs:

• Chip: R5 M240 uses Jet; HD 8690M uses Sun.
• Generation: R5 M240 is Gem System (R5 M200); HD 8690M is Solar System (HD 8600M).
• Base clock: R5 M240 at 1000 MHz; HD 8690M at 925 MHz.
• Boost clock: R5 M240 at 1030 MHz; HD 8690M at 975 MHz.
• Memory clock: R5 M240 at 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective); HD 8690M at 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective).
• Memory size: R5 M240 has 1024 MB; HD 8690M has 2048 MB.
• Memory type: R5 M240 uses DDR3; HD 8690M uses GDDR5.
• Memory bandwidth: R5 M240 at 14.40 GB/s; HD 8690M at 32.00 GB/s.
• Pixel rate: R5 M240 at 8.240 GPixel/s; HD 8690M at 7.800 GPixel/s.
• Texture rate: R5 M240 at 20.60 GTexel/s; HD 8690M at 19.50 GTexel/s.
• FP32: R5 M240 at 659.2 GFLOPS; HD 8690M at 624.0 GFLOPS.
• Release date: R5 M240 on 2014-09-17; HD 8690M on 2013-02-28.
• Predecessor: R5 M240 has Solar System; HD 8690M has London.
• Successor: R5 M240 has Polaris Mobile; HD 8690M has Gem System.
• Benchmark score: R5 M240 at 6975; HD 8690M at 6137.
• Percentile: R5 M240 at 39; HD 8690M at 36.

All other fields, including shading units (320), TMUs (20), ROPs (8), process node (28 nm), foundry (TSMC), transistors (690 million), die size (56 mm²), transistor density (12.3M per mm²), bus interface (PCIe 3.0 x8), and API support (DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.2.170), are identical.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M240 scores 6975 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the AMD Radeon HD 8690M scores 6137. The R5 M240 leads by 13.7%.

Q: How much memory does each GPU have, and what type?

A: The R5 M240 has 1024 MB of DDR3 memory, while the HD 8690M has 2048 MB of GDDR5 memory. Both use a 64-bit bus.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The HD 8690M provides 32.00 GB/s of bandwidth, which is more than double the R5 M240’s 14.40 GB/s.

Q: Are the shading units the same?

A: Yes, both GPUs have 320 shading units, 20 texture mapping units, and 8 raster output units.

Q: Which GPU has a higher clock speed?

A: The R5 M240 runs at 1000 MHz base and 1030 MHz boost, while the HD 8690M runs at 925 MHz base and 975 MHz boost.

Q: What is the release date for each?

A: The R5 M240 was released on 2014-09-17, and the HD 8690M was released on 2013-02-28.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon R5 M240 wins in compute performance. Its 6975 OpenCL score is 13.7% higher than the HD 8690M’s, and its FP32 throughput of 659.2 GFLOPS exceeds the HD 8690M’s 624.0 GFLOPS. The R5 M240 also has higher pixel and texture rates, at 8.240 GPixel/s and 20.60 GTexel/s respectively, compared to the HD 8690M’s 7.800 GPixel/s and 19.50 GTexel/s. For any workload that stresses shader processing, such as general-purpose compute or graphics rendering, the R5 M240 is the better option. Its higher base and boost clocks give it a consistent edge in clock-for-clock efficiency.

The AMD Radeon HD 8690M wins in memory capacity and bandwidth. Its 2048 MB of GDDR5 memory is twice the R5 M240’s 1024 MB of DDR3, and its 32.00 GB/s bandwidth is more than double the R5 M240’s 14.40 GB/s. This makes the HD 8690M more suitable for applications that require large data sets to be held in VRAM or that are sensitive to memory throughput. In scenarios where textures exceed 1 GB or where compute kernels repeatedly access large buffers, the HD 8690M’s memory subsystem could mitigate performance losses that the R5 M240 would suffer due to bandwidth constraints. The HD 8690M also has a higher effective memory clock at 4 Gbps versus 1800 Mbps, further cementing its memory advantage.

The database records one win for the R5 M240 and zero for the HD 8690M in direct head-to-head benchmarks. The R5 M240’s victory in OpenCL is decisive, but the HD 8690M’s memory specification provides a counterpoint that is not captured in that single test. Users who run compute-heavy workloads should favor the R5 M240, while those who prioritize memory bandwidth or capacity should consider the HD 8690M. The data does not include a benchmark that isolates memory performance, so the HD 8690M’s advantage in this area remains a specification-based inference rather than a measured result.