AMD Radeon R5 M230 vs AMD Radeon R5 M430 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark database contains a single direct comparison between these two mobile graphics processors, and it clearly favors the newer part. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the AMD Radeon R5 M430 records a score of 5152 against 4577 for the AMD Radeon R5 M230. That represents a 12.6% advantage for the M430, a meaningful gap in a segment where integrated and entry-level discrete parts typically trade blows within a few percentage points.

Context from the nearest rivals helps frame this result. The M430's average benchmark score sits at 5018, placing it just 0.3% behind the AMD FirePro W4170M (5034) and 0.4% ahead of the AMD Radeon R7 Graphics (4998). The M430 also edges out the NVIDIA Quadro 4000 (4979) by 0.8%, while trailing the AMD Radeon R7 M340 (5063) by 0.9%. These are tight margins, suggesting the M430 occupies a narrow performance band where small clock differences decide the ranking.

The M230's average score of 4577 tells a different story. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 560 (4569), a 0.2% gap in favor of the M230, and the Intel HD Graphics P530 (4560), which trails by 0.4%. The M230 also sits 0.9% behind the NVIDIA Quadro M3000M (4621) and 1.1% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M (4628). Notably, the M230's competitor list includes much higher-tier desktop and mobile parts, which underscores how far its raw compute performance has fallen relative to the broader GPU landscape.

The percentile data confirms the positioning. The M430 ranks in the 30th percentile of all GPUs in the database, while the M230 sits at the 27th percentile. That three-percentile gap may sound modest, but in a database dominated by far more powerful discrete parts, it represents a real step up in compute capability. The M430's 12.6% lead in the one benchmark where both were measured is consistent with its higher placement in the overall distribution.

There are no reverse wins for the M230 in the head-to-head data. The M430 wins the single recorded comparison, and the win count reflects that: one win for the M430, zero for the M230. The M230 does not appear to have a Geekbench Vulkan result recorded, while the M430 posts a Vulkan score of 4884. That absence limits the comparison to a single workload, but it also highlights a gap in the M230's validation coverage.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs share the same fundamental design. They are built on the Jet chip using the GCN 1.0 architecture, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. Both integrate 690 million transistors on a 56 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 12.3 million per square millimeter. The shading unit count is identical at 320, with 20 texture mapping units and 8 raster operation units. Neither part includes ray tracing cores or tensor cores, as these predate those hardware blocks.

The memory subsystem is where the first real divergence appears. The R5 M430 ships with 4 GB of DDR3 memory on a 64-bit bus, while the R5 M230 carries 2 GB of DDR3 on the same 64-bit interface. Both run the memory at 1000 MHz with 2 Gbps effective data rate, producing an identical 16.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The doubling of capacity on the M430 does not improve bandwidth, but it does allow larger working sets to remain resident, which can matter for texture-heavy workloads or multi-tasking scenarios.

Clock speeds separate these parts more decisively. The M430 runs at a base clock of 780 MHz with a boost clock of 855 MHz. The M230's base and boost clocks are not recorded in the database, leaving only its derived rates to infer performance. The pixel rate for the M430 is 6.840 GPixel/s, versus 4.880 GPixel/s for the M230. Texture rate follows the same pattern: 17.10 GTexel/s for the M430, 12.20 GTexel/s for the M230. Floating point output reaches 547.2 GFLOPS on the M430, while the M230 manages 390.4 GFLOPS. These figures imply the M230's clocks are roughly 28% lower than the M430's, which directly explains the benchmark gap.

The two parts belong to different generations within the same "Gem System" family. The M430 is listed under the R5 M400 generation, while the M230 comes from the R5 M200 generation. Both share the same predecessor ("Solar System") and successor ("Polaris Mobile") designations, indicating they are sequential iterations of the same product line rather than fundamentally different architectures. The M230 carries a release date of January 6, 2014, while the M430 has no recorded release date, but its newer generation placement implies a later introduction.

API support is identical across both parts. Each supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The bus interface is PCIe 3.0 x8 for both, and both are classified as IGP slot width, meaning they are intended for integration into portable devices. Display outputs are likewise "Portable Device Dependent" for both, as these are mobile-only parts. Both are marked as end-of-life production status.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in the recorded benchmark?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M430 wins the only direct comparison, scoring 5152 in Geekbench OpenCL versus 4577 for the R5 M230, a 12.6% advantage.

Q: Do both GPUs have the same memory bandwidth?

A: Yes. Both use DDR3 memory on a 64-bit bus at 1000 MHz with 2 Gbps effective rate, yielding 16.00 GB/s. The M430 has 4 GB capacity, while the M230 has 2 GB.

Q: Are the architectures identical?

A: Both use the same Jet chip with GCN 1.0 architecture, 28 nm process, 690 million transistors, 56 mm² die, 320 shading units, 20 TMUs, and 8 ROPs.

Q: Why does the M430 perform better if the core config is the same?

A: The M430 runs higher clocks. Its base is 780 MHz and boost is 855 MHz, producing 547.2 GFLOPS, 17.10 GTexel/s, and 6.840 GPixel/s. The M230's clocks are not listed, but its rates are lower at 390.4 GFLOPS, 12.20 GTexel/s, and 4.880 GPixel/s.

Q: Does the M230 support Vulkan?

A: The database does not record a Geekbench Vulkan score for the M230, though its API list includes Vulkan 1.2.170. The M430 has a recorded Vulkan score of 4884.

Q: How do these parts rank against all GPUs?

A: The M430 sits in the 30th percentile of all GPUs, while the M230 sits in the 27th percentile.

The Verdict

The data supports a straightforward conclusion: the AMD Radeon R5 M430 is the stronger part in every measurable dimension. Its 12.6% lead in Geekbench OpenCL is substantial for two GPUs with identical core counts and memory bandwidth. The advantage comes from higher clock speeds, which translate directly into more pixel throughput, more texture throughput, and more floating point operations per second. The M430 also doubles the memory capacity to 4 GB, which can help in scenarios where the 2 GB limit of the M230 becomes a bottleneck.

The M230's only consolation is that it still holds its own against a strange set of rivals. It edges the AMD Radeon RX 560 by 0.2% and the Intel HD Graphics P530 by 0.4%, though it trails the NVIDIA Quadro M3000M by 0.9% and the GeForce GTX 970M by 1.1%. These margins are small enough that any driver update or workload variation could flip the ordering. The M430, by contrast, trades blows with a tighter cluster of similar-class parts, staying within 1% of all four nearest rivals.

For a buyer or system integrator choosing between these two, the M430 is the clear pick based on performance alone. It offers the same feature set, the same API support, and the same memory bandwidth, but with higher clocks and double the memory. The M230's earlier release date and lower derived clock rates place it firmly below the M430 in the database's ranking. Neither part is competitive with modern discrete GPUs, but within this narrow comparison, the M430 wins every category that matters.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two parts:

• Generation: M430 is "Gem System (R5 M400)", M230 is "Gem System (R5 M200)"
• Release Date: M230 has a recorded date of 2014-01-06, M430 has no recorded date
• Base Clock: M430 at 780 MHz, M230 not recorded
• Boost Clock: M430 at 855 MHz, M230 not recorded
• Memory Size: M430 has 4 GB, M230 has 2 GB
• Pixel Rate: M430 at 6.840 GPixel/s, M230 at 4.880 GPixel/s
• Texture Rate: M430 at 17.10 GTexel/s, M230 at 12.20 GTexel/s
• FP32 Performance: M430 at 547.2 GFLOPS, M230 at 390.4 GFLOPS
• Geekbench OpenCL: M430 at 5152, M230 at 4577
• Geekbench Vulkan: M430 at 4884, M230 not recorded
• Average Benchmark Score: M430 at 5018, M230 at 4577
• Percentile vs All GPUs: M430 at 30, M230 at 27

All other specifications, including chip, architecture, process node, foundry, transistor count, die size, memory type, bus width, memory clock, shading units, TMUs, ROPs, API support, bus interface, slot width, and production status, are identical.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon R5 M430 wins in every recorded benchmark and every derived performance metric. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 5152 exceeds the M230 by 575 points. Its Vulkan score of 4884 has no counterpart for the M230, meaning the M430 is the only one of the two with a validated Vulkan compute result. The M430 also produces 40% more floating point throughput (547.2 GFLOPS versus 390.4 GFLOPS), 40% more texture fill rate (17.10 GTexel/s versus 12.20 GTexel/s), and 40% more pixel throughput (6.840 GPixel/s versus 4.880 GPixel/s).

The M230's advantages are limited to non-performance attributes. It has a recorded release date, making its market debut verifiable, while the M430's release date is absent from the database. The M230 also belongs to an earlier generation, which may matter for compatibility with older software ecosystems, though the identical API support suggests no practical difference. The M230's lower performance does come with the same 16.00 GB/s bandwidth, so memory-bound workloads that do not exceed 2 GB will see no bandwidth penalty, but they will still be limited by the lower compute throughput.

The M430's 4 GB memory capacity gives it a clear edge in workloads that approach or exceed the M230's 2 GB ceiling. Texture-heavy scenes, larger framebuffers, or compute tasks holding substantial working sets will benefit from the extra capacity. The M230's identical bandwidth means it cannot compensate with faster transfers, so the M430's higher clocks and larger memory pool make it the superior choice for any compute or graphics task that fits within the database's recorded metrics.

For users constrained to the M230, the nearest rival data shows it remains competitive with parts like the Radeon RX 560 and Intel HD Graphics P530, within 0.4% either way. But those comparisons are cold comfort against the M430's 12.6% lead. The M430 is the part to select when performance matters, while the M230 only makes sense if the earlier generation or specific release timing is a requirement, which the database does not quantify as a performance benefit.