AMD Radeon R5 M230 vs AMD Radeon RX 560 Comparison

The AMD Radeon R5 M230 and AMD Radeon RX 560 are positioned as direct rivals in the database, yet their benchmark scores tell a story of generational and architectural separation. The R5 M230, an end-of-life integrated part from the GCN 1.0 era, posts an average benchmark score of 4577, placing it in the 27th percentile of all GPUs. The RX 560, a dedicated dual-slot card from the GCN 4.0 generation, has an average score of 4569, putting it in the 26th percentile. The average scores are nearly identical, with a delta of only 0.2% in favor of the R5 M230, but this aggregate figure obscures a massive divergence in specific workloads. The data suggests that while their overall standings are similar, their performance profiles could not be more different.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct head-to-head benchmark available is Geekbench OpenCL, and the results are decisive. The RX 560 scores 16472, while the R5 M230 scores 4577, yielding a delta of -72.2% for the older chip. This is not a marginal victory; it is a landslide. The RX 560 delivers roughly 3.6 times the OpenCL compute performance of the R5 M230. This single data point indicates that for any OpenCL-accelerated workload—be it video encoding, physics simulation, or general-purpose GPU computing—the RX 560 is in a completely different league.

The aggregate average scores, however, create a curious paradox. The R5 M230’s average of 4577 is actually 0.2% higher than the RX 560’s 4569. This is likely because the R5 M230 has only one benchmark entry (Geekbench OpenCL), while the RX 560’s average is dragged down by its numerous Passmark scores, which include low DirectX 10 (16), DirectX 11 (25), and DirectX 12 (21) results. The RX 560’s Passmark G3D score of 3671 and GPU Compute score of 1437 are far more representative of its capabilities, but they dilute the average when combined with the DirectX API tests, which appear to be weighted differently. The headline averages are a statistical artifact; the head-to-head result is the real story.

Looking at the nearest rivals for both cards, the competitive landscape is tight. The R5 M230 is 0.4% ahead of the Intel HD Graphics P530 and 1.1% behind the NVIDIA Quadro M3000M. The RX 560 is 0.2% ahead of the Intel HD Graphics P530 and 1.3% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M. These deltas are all within a few percentage points, suggesting that in the aggregate, these four GPUs are clustered together. Yet the RX 560’s OpenCL score of 16472 dwarfs all of them, implying that the average benchmark methodology severely underrepresents its compute potential.

The Verdict

From the data, the RX 560 is the clear winner for any user prioritizing raw compute performance. Its OpenCL score of 16472 versus 4577 is a 72.2% advantage, which is an overwhelming margin that no other metric can offset. The RX 560 also offers a vastly superior feature set, including 1024 shading units compared to 320, and 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus delivering 112.0 GB/s of bandwidth, versus the R5 M230’s 2 GB DDR3 on a 64-bit bus at 16.00 GB/s. The RX 560’s pixel rate of 20.40 GPixel/s and texture rate of 81.60 GTexel/s are significantly higher than the R5 M230’s 4.880 GPixel/s and 12.20 GTexel/s. For gaming, rendering, or any GPU-accelerated task, the RX 560 is the only rational choice.

The R5 M230, however, is an integrated part (IGP) that consumes no separate power connector and is designed for portability. Its 27th percentile ranking is marginally better than the RX 560’s 26th, but this is a negligible difference that does not reflect real-world utility. The R5 M230’s only advantage is that it exists in a portable device, whereas the RX 560 is a 170 mm dual-slot card requiring a 250 W power supply. If the choice is between a laptop with the R5 M230 and a desktop with the RX 560, the desktop wins on performance, provided the user has the physical space and power budget. The data does not support choosing the R5 M230 for any performance-driven task.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher Geekbench OpenCL score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 560 scores 16472, which is 72.2% higher than the AMD Radeon R5 M230’s score of 4577.

Q: What is the average benchmark score difference between the two cards?

A: The R5 M230 has an average score of 4577, while the RX 560 has an average score of 4569, making the R5 M230 0.2% higher on average.

Q: How does the RX 560 compare to the NVIDIA Quadro M3000M in average score?

A: The RX 560 has an average score of 4569, which is 1.1% lower than the Quadro M3000M’s score of 4621.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The RX 560 has a memory bandwidth of 112.0 GB/s, while the R5 M230 has a bandwidth of 16.00 GB/s.

Q: Which card has a higher pixel rate?

A: The RX 560 has a pixel rate of 20.40 GPixel/s, compared to the R5 M230’s 4.880 GPixel/s.

Q: Are both cards end-of-life?

A: Yes, both the AMD Radeon R5 M230 and the AMD Radeon RX 560 have a production status of "End-of-life."

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every measurable specification. The RX 560 has a base clock of 1175 MHz and a boost clock of 1275 MHz, while the R5 M230 has no listed base or boost clock. The memory clocks also diverge: the R5 M230 runs at 1000 MHz (2 Gbps effective), while the RX 560 runs at 1750 MHz (7 Gbps effective). Memory capacity is 2 GB for the R5 M230 versus 4 GB for the RX 560. The memory type is DDR3 for the former and GDDR5 for the latter, with bus widths of 64 bit and 128 bit, respectively. The shading unit count is 320 for the R5 M230 versus 1024 for the RX 560. TMUs are 20 versus 64, and ROPs are 8 versus 16. The RX 560 has a TDP of 75 W, while the R5 M230 has no TDP listed. The R5 M230 is an IGP with a slot width of "IGP", while the RX 560 is a dual-slot card with a length of 170 mm (6.7 inches) and no power connectors. The RX 560 has a suggested PSU of 250 W. Display outputs differ: the R5 M230 is "Portable Device Dependent", while the RX 560 has 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0b, and 1x DisplayPort 1.4a. The RX 560 has a launch MSRP of 99 USD.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap is generational. The R5 M230 is built on the GCN 1.0 architecture using the Jet chip, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It contains 690 million transistors on a 56 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 12.3M / mm². The RX 560 uses the GCN 4.0 architecture with the Polaris 21 chip, fabricated on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It contains 3,000 million transistors on a 123 mm² die, with a transistor density of 24.4M / mm². The RX 560 has nearly double the transistor density and over four times the raw transistor count. The FP32 performance is stark: 390.4 GFLOPS for the R5 M230 versus 2.611 TFLOPS for the RX 560. The RX 560 also supports FP16 at 2.611 TFLOPS (1:1), while the R5 M230 has no FP16 data. The API support differs: the R5 M230 supports DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170, while the RX 560 supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3. Both support OpenGL 4.6. The RX 560 also has a successor (Vega) and a predecessor (Arctic Islands), while the R5 M230’s predecessor is Solar System and its successor is Polaris Mobile. The RX 560’s release date is 2017-04-17, over three years after the R5 M230’s 2014-01-06 release.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 560 wins in every benchmark category where data exists. Its OpenCL score of 16472 versus 4577 is the definitive win. It also maintains superior scores in all available Passmark tests: G3D (3671), GPU Compute (1437), G2D (485), DirectX 9 (57), DirectX 11 (25), DirectX 12 (21), and DirectX 10 (16). The R5 M230 has no Passmark scores, so it cannot claim any benchmark victory. The only metric where the R5 M230 edges ahead is the aggregate average score (4577 versus 4569) and the percentile ranking (27th versus 26th). These are statistical quirks, not performance wins. The R5 M230’s practical advantage is its form factor as an IGP, which requires no additional power connectors and is suitable for portable devices. The RX 560, with its 75 W TDP and 250 W suggested PSU, is a desktop-only solution. For any user prioritizing compute performance, gaming, or content creation, the RX 560 is the only option supported by the data. For a user who requires an integrated, low-footprint solution in a laptop, the R5 M230 exists, but it does so with a 72.2% performance deficit in OpenCL. The data is unambiguous: the RX 560 is the superior performer across the board, and the R5 M230’s only wins are in the abstract metrics of the database, not in any real-world workload.