AMD Radeon R5 Graphics vs NVIDIA GeForce 930M Comparison

The data in the database presents a close contest between two older integrated and entry-level mobile graphics solutions. The NVIDIA GeForce 930M and the AMD Radeon R5 Graphics each claim one benchmark victory, but the magnitude of those wins is drastically different, telling a clear story about their respective strengths.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the AMD Radeon R5 Graphics takes the lead with a score of 5,183, edging out the NVIDIA GeForce 930M’s score of 5,046. The delta here is a modest 2.6 percent in favor of AMD. This is a narrow victory, suggesting that in raw compute workloads that scale well across the GPU’s architecture, the two parts are near-parity, with AMD holding a slight edge.

The Geekbench Vulkan test tells a completely different story. Here, the NVIDIA GeForce 930M dominates, scoring 3,729 against the AMD Radeon R5 Graphics’ 2,582. The delta is a massive 44.4 percent in favor of NVIDIA. This is not a marginal difference; it is a generational gap in API efficiency. The NVIDIA part is significantly faster when running workloads that leverage the Vulkan API, which is a critical metric for modern gaming and compute applications.

The average benchmark score across both tests further illustrates the split. The NVIDIA GeForce 930M has an average score of 4,388, placing it at the 26th percentile of all GPUs in the database. The AMD Radeon R5 Graphics has a lower average score of 3,883, sitting at the 23rd percentile. While the OpenCL result puts AMD ahead, the Vulkan result drags its overall average down substantially, leaving it roughly 11.5 percent behind NVIDIA’s average.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon R5 Graphics wins in the field of general-purpose compute through the OpenCL interface. Its score of 5,183 is not only higher than the NVIDIA part’s 5,046, but it also sits comfortably ahead of its own nearest rivals. For instance, it is 1.3 percent faster than the NVIDIA GeForce MX110, which has an average score of 3,834. This suggests that in applications that are optimized for OpenCL, the AMD chip can punch above its weight.

The NVIDIA GeForce 930M wins decisively in the Vulkan API. Its score of 3,729 is 44.4 percent higher than what AMD can muster. This is the headline statistic of this comparison. The NVIDIA architecture, Maxwell, appears to handle the lower-level overhead of Vulkan far more efficiently than AMD’s GCN 2.0 implementation. For any workload that uses this modern API, the 930M is the clear choice.

Looking at the rival landscape, the NVIDIA GeForce 930M’s average score of 4,388 places it in a tight cluster. It is 0.5 percent behind the NVIDIA GeForce GT 645M, 0.7 percent ahead of the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200, and 1.2 percent ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 GDDR6. The latter is a strange data point, but the recorded score puts it right in this range. The AMD part, with an average of 3,883, sits 0.4 percent behind the NVIDIA Quadro 2000 and 1.3 percent ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce MX110.

The Verdict

The choice between these two hinges entirely on the application. For users running software that relies on the Vulkan API, the NVIDIA GeForce 930M is the only rational pick. Its 44.4 percent lead in that benchmark is an overwhelming advantage that cannot be ignored. The data clearly shows that NVIDIA’s driver and architecture handle this modern graphics interface with far greater competence.

For legacy or compute-heavy applications that use OpenCL, the AMD Radeon R5 Graphics is the slightly faster option. Its 2.6 percent lead in that specific test is real, but narrow. It does not represent a transformative performance advantage. The AMD part’s higher OpenCL score does not compensate for its massive deficit in Vulkan performance.

The NVIDIA GeForce 930M is the better overall GPU. Its higher average benchmark score, 4,388 versus 3,883, and its commanding Vulkan performance make it the more versatile and future-proof option. The AMD Radeon R5 Graphics is a capable compute chip for specific OpenCL workloads, but it is hampered by a weak Vulkan showing. Users who prioritize any modern gaming or graphics workload should select the NVIDIA part. Users who have a specific, validated OpenCL workload that favors the AMD architecture might see a marginal benefit, but the trade-off is steep.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce 930M has a higher average benchmark score of 4,388, compared to the AMD Radeon R5 Graphics’ 3,883.

Q: How large is the performance difference in the Vulkan test?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce 930M scores 44.4 percent higher than the AMD Radeon R5 Graphics in the Geekbench Vulkan test.

Q: Did the AMD Radeon R5 Graphics win any benchmark?

A: Yes, it won the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 5,183, a 2.6 percent lead over the NVIDIA GeForce 930M.

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

A: The AMD Radeon R5 Graphics has 2,410 million transistors, while the NVIDIA GeForce 930M has 1,020 million transistors.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce 930M has 384 shading units, compared to the 256 shading units in the AMD Radeon R5 Graphics.

Q: What are the TDP ratings for these two GPUs?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce 930M has a TDP of 33 W, while the AMD Radeon R5 Graphics has a lower TDP of 15 W.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are built on fundamentally different architectures and process nodes, though both are fabricated on a 28 nm process. The NVIDIA GeForce 930M uses the GM108S chip, based on the Maxwell architecture, and is manufactured by TSMC. The AMD Radeon R5 Graphics uses the Spectre SL chip, based on GCN 2.0, and is manufactured by GlobalFoundries.

The die sizes differ significantly. NVIDIA’s GM108S is a small chip, measuring 77 mm² and containing 1,020 million transistors, resulting in a transistor density of 13.2 million per mm². AMD’s Spectre SL is a much larger die at 245 mm², packing 2,410 million transistors, but with a lower density of 9.8 million per mm². This reflects a different design philosophy: NVIDIA’s chip is compact and dense, while AMD’s is a larger, more sprawling design.

The memory subsystems are also completely different. The NVIDIA GeForce 930M has a dedicated 2 GB of DDR3 memory on a 64-bit bus, delivering a bandwidth of 12.80 GB/s. The AMD Radeon R5 Graphics uses System Shared memory, meaning its bandwidth is System Dependent and its bus width is System Shared. This is a critical distinction; the NVIDIA part has its own dedicated memory, while AMD relies on the system’s main RAM, which can be a bottleneck.

Core counts also differ. The NVIDIA part has 384 shading units, 24 texture mapping units, and 8 raster operation pipelines. The AMD part has 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 4 ROPs. Despite having fewer cores, the AMD part achieves a higher OpenCL score, pointing to architectural efficiency in compute tasks. The NVIDIA part’s higher core count likely contributes to its Vulkan advantage.

The recorded pixel and texture rates show NVIDIA’s advantage in these fixed-function areas. The GeForce 930M has a pixel rate of 4.392 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 13.18 GTexel/s. The Radeon R5 Graphics has a pixel rate of 3.032 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 12.13 GTexel/s. The NVIDIA part is faster in both metrics.

The API support is a key differentiator. The NVIDIA GeForce 930M supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The AMD Radeon R5 Graphics supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The higher Vulkan version support on NVIDIA may partially explain its dominant Vulkan benchmark score.

Finally, the power envelopes are distinct. The NVIDIA GeForce 930M has a TDP of 33 W, while the AMD Radeon R5 Graphics has a TDP of 15 W. The AMD part is more power-efficient, which can be a significant factor in thin-and-light laptops, but it comes at the cost of raw graphics performance in modern APIs.