AMD Radeon R5 Graphics vs NVIDIA GeForce GT 545 Comparison

AMD Radeon R5 Graphics and NVIDIA GeForce GT 545 are both end-of-life products, but they represent fundamentally different approaches to graphics processing. The data shows a clear overall winner in the AMD Radeon R5 Graphics, which secures a 44.2% lead in the sole head-to-head benchmark, yet the GT 545 offers distinct advantages in raw throughput metrics that suggest it remains relevant for specific tasks. Below is a breakdown of where each contender excels, followed by a detailed analysis of the benchmark data and architectural differences.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon R5 Graphics is the undisputed champion in compute-oriented workloads. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 5183 completely overshadows the GT 545’s 3594, representing a 44.2% performance advantage. This massive gap indicates that for applications leveraging OpenCL—such as video encoding, physics simulations, or general-purpose GPU computing—the Radeon R5 Graphics is the superior choice. Furthermore, the Radeon R5 Graphics also has a Geekbench Vulkan score of 2582, a test the GT 545 does not even participate in due to its lack of Vulkan support. This makes the AMD part the only viable option for modern graphics APIs and any software that relies on Vulkan.

The NVIDIA GeForce GT 545, despite losing the compute benchmark, wins in several traditional rasterization metrics. Its pixel rate of 4.320 GPixel/s is 42.5% higher than the Radeon R5 Graphics’ 3.032 GPixel/s, making it better suited for fill-rate-bound scenarios like high-resolution texture mapping and anti-aliasing. Similarly, its texture rate of 17.28 GTexel/s exceeds the AMD part’s 12.13 GTexel/s by 42.5%, which benefits games and applications that are heavily dependent on texture fetching. The GT 545 also has a dedicated 1536 MB of DDR3 memory with a 192-bit bus, providing 38.40 GB/s of bandwidth, whereas the Radeon R5 Graphics relies on system shared memory with bandwidth that is system dependent. For users with slow system RAM, the GT 545’s dedicated memory pool is a clear advantage in maintaining consistent performance.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 Graphics has an average benchmark score of 3883, which is 289 points higher than the NVIDIA GeForce GT 545’s 3594. This places the Radeon R5 Graphics in the 23rd percentile of all GPUs, while the GT 545 sits at the 21st percentile.

Q: Does the NVIDIA GeForce GT 545 support Vulkan?

A: No. The FACT PACK lists Vulkan support as null for the GT 545, while the AMD Radeon R5 Graphics supports Vulkan version 1.2.170. This is a critical differentiator for modern games and applications.

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

A: The AMD Radeon R5 Graphics, built on a 28 nm process, has a transistor density of 9.8M per mm², which is exactly double the 4.9M per mm² of the NVIDIA GeForce GT 545, which uses a 40 nm process.

Q: Which card has a higher FP32 (single-precision) performance?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GT 545 leads with 414.7 GFLOPS, which is 26.6 GFLOPS higher than the AMD Radeon R5 Graphics’ 388.1 GFLOPS. This is interesting because the Radeon R5 Graphics still wins the OpenCL benchmark, suggesting its architecture is more efficient in real-world compute tests.

Q: Are these GPUs still in production?

A: No. Both are listed as end-of-life products. The AMD Radeon R5 Graphics was released on September 16, 2014, and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 545 was released earlier on May 13, 2011.

Q: What is the launch MSRP of the NVIDIA GeForce GT 545?

A: The launch MSRP is 149 USD. The AMD Radeon R5 Graphics has no listed launch MSRP, as it is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) that is part of a larger APU.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison in the FACT PACK is Geekbench OpenCL, and the result is decisive. The AMD Radeon R5 Graphics scores 5183, while the NVIDIA GeForce GT 545 scores 3594. This yields a delta of 44.2% in favor of AMD. To put this in perspective, the GT 545’s score is closer to its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon HD 6770 (3649), than it is to the Radeon R5 Graphics. The Radeon R5 Graphics’ score even surpasses that of the NVIDIA Quadro 2000 (3898), which is only 0.4% behind it in the rival list. This indicates that the AMD IGP, despite being an integrated solution, delivers compute performance that competes with entry-level discrete workstation cards.

The magnitude of this win is surprising given the raw specifications. The GT 545 has a higher FP32 throughput (414.7 GFLOPS vs. 388.1 GFLOPS) and a higher texture rate (17.28 GTexel/s vs. 12.13 GTexel/s). Yet, in the OpenCL test, the Radeon R5 Graphics is 44.2% faster. This suggests that the GCN 2.0 architecture in the AMD part is far more efficient at executing compute workloads than the older Fermi 2.0 architecture in the NVIDIA card. The Radeon R5 Graphics also has 256 shading units compared to the GT 545’s 144, which likely contributes to its superior parallel processing capabilities, even though its clock speeds and memory subsystem appear weaker on paper.

There are no other head-to-head benchmarks available, so the analysis relies heavily on this single data point. However, the architectural differences and specification gaps provide a clear narrative: AMD wins where compute matters, while NVIDIA wins where memory bandwidth and fill-rate dominate.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every major specification category. The AMD Radeon R5 Graphics is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with a bus interface of "IGP" and a slot width of "IGP," meaning it is embedded in a CPU package. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 545 is a discrete single-slot card with a PCIe 2.0 x16 interface and dimensions of 145 mm (5.7 inches) in length. The GT 545 has a TDP of 70 W and requires a 250 W suggested PSU, while the Radeon R5 Graphics has a TDP of just 15 W and no power connectors or suggested PSU listed.

Memory is another major divergence. The Radeon R5 Graphics uses system shared memory with a system-dependent bandwidth and bus width. In contrast, the GT 545 has 1536 MB of dedicated DDR3 memory on a 192-bit bus, delivering a fixed 38.40 GB/s of bandwidth. The GT 545’s memory runs at 800 MHz (1600 Mbps effective), a specification that is irrelevant for the AMD part since its memory clock is tied to the system.

The display outputs also differ: the Radeon R5 Graphics' outputs are motherboard dependent, while the GT 545 provides 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.3a, and 1x VGA. In terms of raw compute units, the Radeon R5 Graphics has 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 4 ROPs. The GT 545 has fewer shading units (144) but more TMUs (24) and ROPs (16). This explains the GT 545’s higher pixel and texture rates, as it has more dedicated hardware for those tasks.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide is stark. The AMD Radeon R5 Graphics is based on the GCN 2.0 architecture, fabricated on a 28 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It packs 2,410 million transistors onto a 245 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 9.8M per mm². The chip is codenamed "Spectre SL" and is part of the Kaveri generation of IGPs. Its predecessor was the TeraScale 3 IGP, and its successor is the GCN 3.0 IGP. This architecture natively supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170.

The NVIDIA GeForce GT 545 is built on the older Fermi 2.0 architecture, using a 40 nm process at TSMC. It contains 1,170 million transistors on a 238 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 4.9M per mm²—exactly half of AMD’s part. The GF116 chip is part of the GeForce 500 generation, succeeding the GeForce 400 and preceding the GeForce 600. Its API support is more limited: it supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but has no Vulkan support. This is a critical limitation for any modern software that relies on Vulkan for cross-platform rendering.

The differences in transistor count and density are telling. AMD fits more than twice as many transistors into a similar die size (245 mm² vs. 238 mm²), which explains its higher shading unit count and better compute performance. However, the GT 545’s Fermi architecture, while older, is designed with a different balance: more TMUs and ROPs relative to shading units, which favors traditional graphics rendering over general-purpose compute.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous for compute-centric users. The AMD Radeon R5 Graphics wins the only head-to-head benchmark by a 44.2% margin and supports Vulkan, making it the clear choice for OpenCL-based workloads, modern gaming that uses Vulkan, or any task requiring the latest graphics API. Its 15 W TDP also makes it vastly more power-efficient, as it is an IGP with no additional power draw beyond the host CPU. For users building a low-power system or an HTPC where space and cooling are limited, the Radeon R5 Graphics is the superior option, provided the motherboard supports it.

The NVIDIA GeForce GT 545, however, is the better pick for users who prioritize traditional rasterization performance over compute. Its higher pixel rate (4.320 GPixel/s vs. 3.032 GPixel/s) and texture rate (17.28 GTexel/s vs. 12.13 GTexel/s) make it more capable for older DirectX 11 games that are fill-rate bound. Its dedicated 1536 MB of memory with 38.40 GB/s bandwidth ensures consistent performance regardless of system RAM speed, a factor that can cripple the Radeon R5 Graphics in memory-intensive scenarios. The GT 545 also has a defined launch MSRP of 149 USD, which is a point of reference for its original market positioning.

In summary, benchmark results indicate that the AMD Radeon R5 Graphics is the future-proof choice for compute and modern APIs, while the NVIDIA GeForce GT 545 remains a viable option for legacy graphics workloads where memory bandwidth and fill-rate are the primary constraints. There is no single winner; the correct choice depends entirely on the intended use case, with the data favoring AMD for anything beyond simple pixel pushing.