AMD Radeon HD 8690M vs NVIDIA GeForce MX130 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a single benchmark comparison between these two mobile graphics processors, and the result is remarkably close. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the AMD Radeon HD 8690M scores 6137, while the NVIDIA GeForce MX130 scores 6102. That is a delta of just 0.6% in favor of the AMD part. In practical terms, this is a statistical tie, and the margin is well within run-to-run variance for any graphics workload.

Looking at the broader database context, both parts sit in a similar performance tier. The AMD Radeon HD 8690M holds a 36th percentile ranking among all GPUs in the database, while the NVIDIA GeForce MX130 sits at the 32nd percentile. That four-point gap in percentile ranking reflects the slight edge the AMD card shows in the OpenCL result, but neither part is breaking out of the entry-level mobile segment.

The AMD card's nearest rivals in the database include the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 at 6117 (0.3% ahead of the AMD part), the NVIDIA RTX A400 at 6078 (1% behind), and the NVIDIA GeForce MX230 at 6077 (1% behind). The only rival that clearly outpaces the HD 8690M is the AMD Radeon HD 6950 at 6210, which sits 1.2% higher. This clustering of scores between 6077 and 6210 shows how tightly packed this performance tier is, and the HD 8690M is essentially trading blows with much newer parts.

For the MX130, the nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M at 5501 (0.1% behind the MX130), the AMD Radeon R7 M440 at 5483 (0.5% behind), the AMD FirePro M4000 at 5537 (0.5% ahead), and the NVIDIA Quadro M4000 at 5467 (0.7% behind). The MX130's average benchmark score across all recorded tests is 5508, which is lower than its OpenCL score of 6102 because it also has a Geekbench Vulkan result of 4914, dragging the average down. The HD 8690M only has the single OpenCL result, so its average matches its OpenCL score at 6137.

When comparing the head-to-head winner, the AMD Radeon HD 8690M takes the single recorded win. However, the delta is so small that any real-world application would likely see these two GPUs perform identically. The MX130 counters with a much stronger Vulkan result in its own benchmark suite, but there is no direct Vulkan comparison recorded between these two specific parts. The data only tells us what was measured head-to-head: one OpenCL test, one narrow AMD win.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher raw compute throughput based on the database specifications?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce MX130 has the higher FP32 throughput at 913.2 GFLOPS, compared to 624.0 GFLOPS for the AMD Radeon HD 8690M. That is a substantial 46% advantage in theoretical peak compute for the NVIDIA part.

Q: How do the memory bandwidth figures compare between these two GPUs?

A: The MX130 offers 40.10 GB/s of memory bandwidth, while the HD 8690M delivers 32.00 GB/s. Both use 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 64-bit bus, but the MX130 runs its memory at 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective) versus 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective) for the AMD part.

Q: Which GPU has a higher pixel fill rate?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce MX130 achieves 9.512 GPixel/s, while the AMD Radeon HD 8690M reaches 7.800 GPixel/s. Both have 8 ROPs, but the MX130's higher core clocks drive its fill rate advantage.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon HD 8690M support newer graphics APIs than the MX130?

A: The AMD part supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The MX130 supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. So the MX130 has a newer Vulkan version, while the AMD card has a slightly higher DirectX feature level.

Q: What is the transistor density difference between the two chips?

A: The MX130's GM108S chip packs 1,020 million transistors into a 77 mm² die, yielding a density of 13.2M transistors per mm². The HD 8690M's Sun chip has 690 million transistors on a 56 mm² die, giving it 12.3M transistors per mm².

Q: Which GPU holds a higher position in the overall database percentile rankings?

A: The AMD Radeon HD 8690M ranks at the 36th percentile among all GPUs, while the NVIDIA GeForce MX130 ranks at the 32nd percentile. This matches the head-to-head OpenCL result, where the AMD part leads by a narrow margin.

The Verdict

The data paints a clear picture of two closely matched entry-level mobile GPUs. The AMD Radeon HD 8690M wins the only direct head-to-head benchmark, edging out the MX130 by 0.6% in Geekbench OpenCL. It also holds a higher overall percentile ranking, 36th versus 32nd. For users prioritizing the specific OpenCL workload measured here, the AMD part is the pick.

However, the NVIDIA GeForce MX130 has compelling strengths in the specification sheet. Its FP32 throughput of 913.2 GFLOPS is dramatically higher than the HD 8690M's 624.0 GFLOPS, and its memory bandwidth of 40.10 GB/s exceeds the AMD part's 32.00 GB/s. Higher texture rate (28.54 GTexel/s versus 19.50 GTexel/s) and pixel rate (9.512 GPixel/s versus 7.800 GPixel/s) also favor the MX130. The MX130 also supports Vulkan 1.4, a newer API version than the HD 8690M's Vulkan 1.2.170.

The production timeline also matters. The HD 8690M was released in early 2013, while the MX130 arrived in late 2017. Both are now end-of-life, but the MX130 is the more recent design with a larger transistor budget (1,020 million versus 690 million) and a wider feature set. The MX130's TDP is listed at 30 W, while the HD 8690M has no recorded TDP, but the MX130 is specified as an integrated graphics processor with no power connectors.

For a user choosing between these two based purely on the recorded data, the decision hinges on workload. The AMD part wins the only measured benchmark and holds a better percentile rank. The NVIDIA part offers superior theoretical compute, memory bandwidth, and newer API support. In a direct OpenCL comparison, the HD 8690M is the narrow winner. For any scenario leveraging Vulkan or raw compute throughput, the MX130's specifications suggest it would pull ahead, though no direct Vulkan head-to-head was recorded. The data supports the AMD card as the marginally better performer in the measured test, but the MX130 has the more modern and capable specification profile overall.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon HD 8690M | NVIDIA GeForce MX130 |

|---|---|---|

| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Maxwell |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | TSMC |

| Transistors | 690 million | 1,020 million |

| Die Size | 56 mm² | 77 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 12.3M / mm² | 13.2M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 925 MHz | 1109 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 975 MHz | 1189 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1000 MHz, 4 Gbps effective | 1253 MHz, 5 Gbps effective |

| Memory Bandwidth | 32.00 GB/s | 40.10 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 320 | 384 |

| TMUs | 20 | 24 |

| ROPs | 8 | 8 |

| Pixel Rate | 7.800 GPixel/s | 9.512 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 19.50 GTexel/s | 28.54 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 624.0 GFLOPS | 913.2 GFLOPS |

| TDP | Not recorded | 30 W |

| Slot Width | Not recorded | IGP |

| Power Connectors | Not recorded | None |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x4 |

| Display Outputs | Not recorded | Portable Device Dependent |

| DirectX Support | 12 (11_1) | 12 (11_0) |

| Vulkan Support | 1.2.170 | 1.4 |

| Release Date | 2013-02-28 | 2017-11-16 |

The two GPUs share the same process node, foundry, memory size, memory type, and memory bus width. Everything else in the specification sheet differs, with the MX130 holding the advantage in clocks, memory speed, compute units, and throughput rates.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon HD 8690M is built on GCN 1.0 architecture, AMD's first generation of Graphics Core Next, implemented in the Sun chip. The NVIDIA GeForce MX130 uses the Maxwell architecture, implemented in the GM108S chip. Both are manufactured by TSMC on a 28 nm process, but the design philosophies diverge significantly.

GCN 1.0 was designed for compute-heavy workloads with a unified shader architecture. The Sun chip packs 320 shading units, 20 texture mapping units, and 8 ROPs. The Maxwell architecture in the GM108S takes a different approach, emphasizing efficiency and higher clock speeds. It contains 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. The Maxwell chip achieves its higher throughput with more execution resources and substantially higher clocks: 1109 MHz base and 1189 MHz boost, versus 925 MHz base and 975 MHz boost for the GCN part.

The transistor budgets tell a story of generational progress. The GM108S uses 1,020 million transistors across a 77 mm² die, while the Sun chip uses 690 million transistors on a 56 mm² die. This gives the NVIDIA chip a slightly higher transistor density, 13.2M per mm² versus 12.3M per mm². The extra transistors in the Maxwell part enable more shading units, higher clocks, and a larger memory controller that delivers 40.10 GB/s versus 32.00 GB/s.

The memory subsystems share a common foundation: 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 64-bit bus. But the MX130 runs its memory at 1253 MHz with 5 Gbps effective data rate, while the HD 8690M runs at 1000 MHz with 4 Gbps effective. The result is a 25% bandwidth advantage for the NVIDIA part.

API support also reflects the architectural differences. The GCN 1.0 part lists DirectX 12 (11_1), which includes the 11_1 feature level, while the Maxwell part lists DirectX 12 (11_0), a slightly lower feature level. However, the MX130 supports Vulkan 1.4, a much newer version than the HD 8690M's Vulkan 1.2.170. Both support OpenGL 4.6.

The bus interface differs as well. The HD 8690M uses PCIe 3.0 x8, while the MX130 uses PCIe 3.0 x4. The wider bus on the AMD part could reduce transfer bottlenecks, though the MX130's higher memory bandwidth may compensate. The MX130 is explicitly listed as an IGP with no power connectors and a 30 W TDP, while the HD 8690M has no recorded power specifications.

The generation names reflect their respective product families. The HD 8690M belongs to the Solar System generation (HD 8600M series), with a predecessor codenamed London and a successor in the Gem System. The MX130 belongs to the GeForce MX (1xx) generation, with no recorded predecessor or successor. The release dates are nearly five years apart: February 2013 for the AMD part, November 2017 for the NVIDIA part.