AMD Radeon R5 M230 vs AMD Radeon R6 M255DX Comparison

# AMD Radeon R6 M255DX vs AMD Radeon R5 M230

The AMD Radeon R6 M255DX and AMD Radeon R5 M230 are two integrated-class mobile GPUs from the same 28 nm Jet chip generation, both built on GCN 1.0 architecture and sharing the same 690-million-transistor, 56 mm² die. The data reveals a curious split: the R6 M255DX scores 4867 in Geekbench Vulkan, while the R5 M230 scores 4577 in Geekbench OpenCL. These are different benchmark APIs, so a direct score-to-score comparison is not apples-to-apples, but each GPU's position relative to its own nearest rivals tells a distinct story about where each part sits in the performance hierarchy. The R6 M255DX lands in the 28th percentile of all GPUs, while the R5 M230 sits just one point lower at the 27th percentile, indicating they are closely matched overall despite their different benchmark results.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

There are no direct head-to-head benchmark entries in the data, so the comparison must be drawn from each GPU's individual benchmark scores and their nearest rival lists. The R6 M255DX's Vulkan score of 4867 places it within a razor-thin margin of its nearest rivals. It trails the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 8 GB by just 0.7% (that rival scores 4901), and it leads the NVIDIA GeForce GTS 450 by 0.5% (which scores 4893). The R6 M255DX also edges out the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560M by 0.2% (4855) and the NVIDIA GeForce 940MX by 0.5% (4844). This clustering within a 57-point spread suggests the R6 M255DX is operating in a very tight competitive band where even a single driver revision could flip the ordering.

The R5 M230's OpenCL score of 4577 tells a similar story of tight competition, but against a different set of rivals. It sits 0.2% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 560 (4569) and 0.4% ahead of the Intel HD Graphics P530 (4560). On the losing side, it trails the NVIDIA Quadro M3000M by 0.9% (that rival scores 4621) and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M by 1.1% (4628). The spread here is 68 points, slightly wider than the R6 M255DX's band, but still remarkably close. What is most striking is that the R5 M230 is competing with desktop-class parts like the RX 560 and high-end mobile parts like the GTX 970M, despite being an entry-level integrated GPU. The 27th percentile ranking confirms it is not a top performer, but the data shows it is not far off from much more prestigious names.

Interpreting the percentile gap is instructive. The R6 M255DX at the 28th percentile and the R5 M230 at the 27th percentile are statistically neighbors in the overall GPU landscape. The difference of one percentile point is negligible in practical terms, but the benchmark scores themselves differ by 290 points (4867 vs 4577). That 6% gap in raw scores is likely attributable to the different APIs tested rather than a true performance difference, since both GPUs share the same chip, architecture, and core counts. The R6 M255DX's Vulkan result may benefit from newer driver optimization for that API, while the R5 M230's OpenCL result reflects a different workload profile. Neither GPU has a decisive victory in this data; the head-to-head benchmark list is empty, and both have zero wins recorded.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon R6 M255DX scores 4867 in Geekbench Vulkan, while the AMD Radeon R5 M230 scores 4577 in Geekbench OpenCL. The R6 M255DX's score is 290 points higher, but because the tests use different APIs, this is not a direct performance comparison.

Q: How do these GPUs rank against all other GPUs?

A: The R6 M255DX sits at the 28th percentile of all GPUs, and the R5 M230 sits at the 27th percentile. This one-percentile difference indicates they are essentially equivalent in overall standing.

Q: What are the nearest rivals for each GPU?

A: For the R6 M255DX, the nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560M (4855, 0.2% behind), NVIDIA GeForce 940MX (4844, 0.5% behind), NVIDIA GeForce GTS 450 (4893, 0.5% ahead), and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 8 GB (4901, 0.7% ahead). For the R5 M230, the nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon RX 560 (4569, 0.2% behind), Intel HD Graphics P530 (4560, 0.4% behind), NVIDIA Quadro M3000M (4621, 0.9% ahead), and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M (4628, 1.1% ahead).

Q: Do both GPUs use the same chip?

A: Yes, both use the Jet chip built on GCN 1.0 architecture, with 690 million transistors on a 56 mm² die at 28 nm. They also share identical shading units (320), texture mapping units (20), and raster output units (8).

Q: What memory configurations do they use?

A: The R6 M255DX uses system-shared memory, with its bandwidth marked as system-dependent. The R5 M230 has 2 GB of dedicated DDR3 memory on a 64-bit bus, delivering 16.00 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: What is the production status of these GPUs?

A: Both are end-of-life products, released on the same date in 2014. The R5 M230 lists its predecessor as Solar System and successor as Polaris Mobile, while the R6 M255DX has no predecessor or successor listed.

The Verdict

The data points to a near-tie between these two GPUs, with the R6 M255DX holding a slight edge in raw benchmark score and percentile ranking. The R6 M255DX's 4867 Vulkan score places it within 0.7% of the RTX 5060 Ti 8 GB and ahead of the GTX 560M and 940MX, which are respectable names in the mobile GPU space. The R5 M230's 4577 OpenCL score puts it within 1.1% of the GTX 970M, a much more powerful part in absolute terms, but the R5 M230 still trails in raw numbers. For a user who values the highest possible compute score, the R6 M255DX is the clear pick from this data. For a user who needs dedicated VRAM, the R5 M230's 2 GB DDR3 on a 64-bit bus is the only option, as the R6 M255DX relies entirely on system-shared memory. The R5 M230 also has a PCIe 3.0 x8 bus interface, while the R6 M255DX uses an IGP bus interface, which may affect how each GPU is deployed in a system. Neither GPU offers a meaningful performance advantage over the other; the choice comes down to memory architecture and system integration.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs diverge in several specification fields. The R6 M255DX has a base clock of 780 MHz and a boost clock of 855 MHz, while the R5 M230 lists no base or boost clock but specifies a memory clock of 1000 MHz (2 Gbps effective). The R6 M255DX's memory is system-shared with system-dependent bandwidth, whereas the R5 M230 has 2 GB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus with 16.00 GB/s bandwidth. The pixel rate differs: the R6 M255DX achieves 6.840 GPixel/s, while the R5 M230 manages 4.880 GPixel/s. Texture rates also differ, with the R6 M255DX at 17.10 GTexel/s versus the R5 M230's 12.20 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is higher on the R6 M255DX at 547.2 GFLOPS, compared to the R5 M230's 390.4 GFLOPS. The bus interface is IGP for the R6 M255DX and PCIe 3.0 x8 for the R5 M230. The generation labels differ as well: the R6 M255DX is from the Gem System Hybrid (Rx M200) generation, while the R5 M230 is from the Gem System (R5 M200) generation. The R5 M230 also has a predecessor (Solar System) and successor (Polaris Mobile), while the R6 M255DX has neither listed.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs share the same fundamental architecture: GCN 1.0 on a 28 nm TSMC process with 690 million transistors on a 56 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 12.3M per mm². They have identical shading units (320), TMUs (20), and ROPs (8), and both support DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. Neither has ray tracing cores or tensor cores. The architectural differences are therefore minimal, confined to clock speeds and memory configuration. The R6 M255DX runs its shaders at 780 MHz base and 855 MHz boost, which directly drives its higher pixel rate (6.840 GPixel/s vs 4.880 GPixel/s) and texture rate (17.10 GTexel/s vs 12.20 GTexel/s). The R5 M230's lack of listed core clocks suggests it operates at a lower frequency, consistent with its lower FP32 output (390.4 GFLOPS vs 547.2 GFLOPS). The memory subsystem is the other major divergence: the R6 M255DX shares system memory, making its bandwidth dependent on the host platform, while the R5 M230 has a dedicated 2 GB DDR3 pool at 16.00 GB/s. The R5 M230's PCIe 3.0 x8 interface allows it to communicate with the host independently, whereas the R6 M255DX relies on the IGP path. These differences suggest the R6 M255DX is designed for scenarios where system memory bandwidth is sufficient, while the R5 M230 is better suited for systems with dedicated VRAM requirements.

Where Each One Wins

The R6 M255DX wins on raw compute metrics. Its 547.2 GFLOPS FP32 performance is 40% higher than the R5 M230's 390.4 GFLOPS, and its pixel rate (6.840 GPixel/s) and texture rate (17.10 GTexel/s) are both roughly 40% higher as well. In benchmark terms, its 4867 Vulkan score beats the R5 M230's 4577 OpenCL score by 290 points, and it achieves a higher percentile ranking (28th vs 27th). The R6 M255DX also holds its own against more prominent rivals, sitting within 0.7% of the RTX 5060 Ti 8 GB and leading the GTX 560M and 940MX. This GPU is the better choice for compute-heavy workloads that can leverage Vulkan, where its higher clock speeds translate into measurable performance gains.

The R5 M230 wins on memory architecture and system integration. Its dedicated 2 GB DDR3 VRAM on a 64-bit bus provides 16.00 GB/s of bandwidth that is not dependent on system memory, avoiding the "System Dependent" bandwidth caveat of the R6 M255DX. The PCIe 3.0 x8 interface is a more standard and flexible connection than the IGP bus of the R6 M255DX, potentially making the R5 M230 easier to integrate into a wider range of laptops. In its OpenCL benchmark, the R5 M230 comes within 1.1% of the GTX 970M, a much more powerful discrete GPU, suggesting it punches above its weight in certain OpenCL workloads. For systems where dedicated VRAM is a necessity and where OpenCL is the primary API, the R5 M230 is the stronger candidate. The two GPUs are otherwise so close in overall standing that the decision rests on whether the user prioritizes raw compute (R6 M255DX) or dedicated memory and interface flexibility (R5 M230).