AMD Radeon R5 M230 vs NVIDIA GeForce 830M Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a single direct comparison between the AMD Radeon R5 M230 and the NVIDIA GeForce 830M in the Geekbench OpenCL test. The AMD part scores 4577, while the NVIDIA part scores 4324. That places the AMD Radeon R5 M230 ahead by 5.9 percent in this compute-oriented workload.

This is a meaningful margin for two mobile GPUs from the same era. A 5.9 percent lead in OpenCL indicates that the AMD chip extracts more raw compute throughput from its available resources in this particular test. The AMD Radeon R5 M230 also holds a better position in the overall database percentile ranking, sitting at the 27th percentile among all GPUs, compared to the NVIDIA GeForce 830M at the 24th percentile.

However, the NVIDIA GeForce 830M has an additional benchmark result that the AMD part lacks: a Geekbench Vulkan score of 3590. There is no equivalent Vulkan score recorded for the AMD Radeon R5 M230, so no direct head-to-head comparison can be made in that API. The presence of this result does not change the head-to-head win count, which stands at one win for AMD and zero for NVIDIA.

Looking at the average benchmark scores across all recorded tests, the AMD Radeon R5 M230 averages 4577, while the NVIDIA GeForce 830M averages 3957. The NVIDIA figure is dragged down by its lower Vulkan score, but the database treats the average as the aggregate performance indicator. That gives the AMD part a clear aggregate advantage of roughly 15.7 percent.

The nearest rival data for each GPU provides additional context. For the AMD Radeon R5 M230, the closest competitors are the AMD Radeon RX 560 at 4569 (0.2 percent behind), the Intel HD Graphics P530 at 4560 (0.4 percent behind), the NVIDIA Quadro M3000M at 4621 (0.9 percent ahead), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M at 4628 (1.1 percent ahead). This places the AMD Radeon R5 M230 in a tightly packed cluster where a few points separate it from much more powerful desktop and mobile parts in other workloads.

For the NVIDIA GeForce 830M, the nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon R5 M420 at 3956 (essentially tied), the NVIDIA GeForce GT 745M at 3953 (0.1 percent behind), the NVIDIA Quadro K2000 at 3964 (0.2 percent ahead), and the AMD Radeon HD 6850 X2 at 3977 (0.5 percent ahead). This shows the GeForce 830M sitting in a slightly lower performance tier, with its closest competitors all within half a percent.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon R5 M230 wins in the OpenCL compute benchmark, and that is the only head-to-head test with recorded results for both parts. The 5.9 percent margin suggests that for OpenCL-based workloads, such as general-purpose GPU compute tasks, the AMD architecture has an edge.

The NVIDIA GeForce 830M, on the other hand, has a Vulkan score recorded. While there is no AMD Vulkan score to compare directly, the existence of this result indicates that the NVIDIA driver stack and hardware support Vulkan at version 1.4. The AMD Radeon R5 M230 supports Vulkan 1.2.170. For users running Vulkan applications, the NVIDIA part has a recorded performance baseline of 3590, which is below its own OpenCL score.

In terms of use cases, the AMD Radeon R5 M230 appears better suited for compute-heavy tasks that leverage OpenCL. Its higher shading unit count, 320 versus 256 for the NVIDIA part, likely contributes to this advantage. The AMD chip also has more texture mapping units, 20 versus 16, and a higher memory clock of 1000 MHz effective at 2 Gbps, compared to the NVIDIA memory clock of 900 MHz effective at 1800 Mbps. This results in higher memory bandwidth for the AMD part: 16.00 GB/s versus 14.40 GB/s.

For gaming and graphics rendering, the situation is less clear. The NVIDIA GeForce 830M has a significantly higher pixel rate at 9.200 GPixel/s versus 4.880 GPixel/s for the AMD part. It also has a higher texture rate at 18.40 GTexel/s versus 12.20 GTexel/s. These metrics suggest that in rasterization-heavy workloads, the NVIDIA chip could have an advantage, but there are no direct gaming benchmarks in the recorded data to confirm this.

The NVIDIA GeForce 830M also has a defined boost clock of 1150 MHz and a base clock of 1082 MHz. The AMD Radeon R5 M230 has no base or boost clock listed in the database, only its memory clock. This makes it difficult to assess sustained performance characteristics for the AMD part.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations and design philosophies. The AMD Radeon R5 M230 uses the GCN 1.0 architecture, built on a 28 nm process at TSMC. The chip, codenamed Jet, contains 690 million transistors on a die size of 56 mm². The transistor density is 12.3 million per square millimeter.

The NVIDIA GeForce 830M uses the Maxwell architecture, also built on a 28 nm process at TSMC. The chip, designated GM108, contains 1,020 million transistors on a die size of 77 mm². The transistor density is 13.2 million per square millimeter. This means the NVIDIA chip has roughly 48 percent more transistors packed into a die that is about 37 percent larger in area.

The compute configuration differs notably. The AMD Radeon R5 M230 has 320 shading units, 20 texture mapping units, and 8 render output units. The NVIDIA GeForce 830M has 256 shading units, 16 texture mapping units, and 8 render output units. Despite having fewer shading units, the NVIDIA part achieves higher pixel and texture rates due to its higher clock speeds.

Memory subsystems are similar in width but differ in speed. Both use 2 GB of DDR3 memory on a 64-bit bus. The AMD part runs its memory at 1000 MHz with 2 Gbps effective throughput, yielding 16.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The NVIDIA part runs its memory at 900 MHz with 1800 Mbps effective throughput, yielding 14.40 GB/s of bandwidth.

The floating-point performance tells an interesting story. The AMD Radeon R5 M230 delivers 390.4 GFLOPS of FP32 compute. The NVIDIA GeForce 830M delivers 588.8 GFLOPS of FP32 compute. That is roughly 51 percent higher FP32 throughput for the NVIDIA chip, despite its lower score in the OpenCL benchmark. This discrepancy suggests that the OpenCL test may not be purely compute-bound, or that driver efficiency and memory latency play a larger role than raw throughput.

The TDP figures also differ. The NVIDIA GeForce 830M is rated at 33 W, while the AMD Radeon R5 M230 has no TDP listed in the database. Both are classified as IGP slot width, meaning they are integrated into portable devices.

In terms of API support, the AMD Radeon R5 M230 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The NVIDIA GeForce 830M supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA part has a newer Vulkan version, while the AMD part has a slightly higher DirectX feature level.

The generation lineage differs as well. The AMD Radeon R5 M230 comes from the Gem System generation within the R5 M200 family, with its predecessor noted as Solar System and successor as Polaris Mobile. The NVIDIA GeForce 830M comes from the GeForce 800M generation, with predecessor GeForce 700M and successor GeForce 900M.

Both parts are marked as end-of-life production status. The AMD part has a release date of January 6, 2014, while the NVIDIA part has a release date of March 11, 2014.

The bus interface is identical: PCIe 3.0 x8 for both. Display outputs are listed as portable device dependent for both, meaning they rely on the host laptop's display connections.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher OpenCL benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M230 scores 4577 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the NVIDIA GeForce 830M scores 4324. The AMD part leads by 5.9 percent.

Q: Does the NVIDIA GeForce 830M have any benchmark advantage?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce 830M has a recorded Geekbench Vulkan score of 3590. The AMD Radeon R5 M230 has no Vulkan score in the database, so no direct comparison is possible in that API.

Q: How do these GPUs compare in terms of memory bandwidth?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M230 has 16.00 GB/s of bandwidth, while the NVIDIA GeForce 830M has 14.40 GB/s. Both use 2 GB of DDR3 memory on a 64-bit bus.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M230 has 320 shading units, compared to 256 for the NVIDIA GeForce 830M. The AMD part also has 20 texture mapping units versus 16 for the NVIDIA part.

Q: What are the pixel and texture rates for each GPU?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce 830M has a pixel rate of 9.200 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 18.40 GTexel/s. The AMD Radeon R5 M230 has a pixel rate of 4.880 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 12.20 GTexel/s.

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce 830M delivers 588.8 GFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the AMD Radeon R5 M230 delivers 390.4 GFLOPS. The NVIDIA part has roughly 51 percent higher raw FP32 throughput.

Q: What is the transistor count for each chip?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce 830M has 1,020 million transistors on a 77 mm² die. The AMD Radeon R5 M230 has 690 million transistors on a 56 mm² die.

The Verdict

The data presents a nuanced picture. In the only direct head-to-head benchmark, the AMD Radeon R5 M230 wins the OpenCL test by 5.9 percent. It also holds a higher overall percentile ranking at 27 versus 24, and a higher average benchmark score at 4577 versus 3957.

However, the NVIDIA GeForce 830M shows strengths in raw graphics throughput metrics. Its pixel rate of 9.200 GPixel/s is nearly double the AMD part's 4.880 GPixel/s. Its texture rate of 18.40 GTexel/s is about 51 percent higher than the AMD part's 12.20 GTexel/s. Its FP32 compute of 588.8 GFLOPS is significantly higher than the AMD part's 390.4 GFLOPS. These are not minor differences.

The OpenCL result tells the opposite story, suggesting that the AMD Radeon R5 M230 performs better in that specific compute workload despite lower theoretical throughput figures. This could be due to driver optimization, memory bandwidth advantages, or the specific characteristics of the OpenCL test.

For users focused on OpenCL compute tasks, the AMD Radeon R5 M230 is the better choice based on the recorded data. Its 5.9 percent lead in the head-to-head test and its higher average score make it the safer pick for that workload.

For users prioritizing Vulkan compatibility, the NVIDIA GeForce 830M has a recorded score of 3590 and supports Vulkan 1.4, a newer version than the AMD part's Vulkan 1.2.170. The AMD part has no Vulkan result, so anyone needing Vulkan performance should favor the NVIDIA chip.

For traditional graphics rendering, the NVIDIA GeForce 830M appears stronger based on pixel rate, texture rate, and FP32 throughput. While there are no direct gaming benchmarks in the database, these metrics typically correlate with rasterization performance.

The nearest rival analysis reinforces this split. The AMD Radeon R5 M230 sits near the AMD Radeon RX 560 and Intel HD Graphics P530, all within 0.4 percent. The NVIDIA GeForce 830M sits near the AMD Radeon R5 M420 and NVIDIA GeForce GT 745M, all within 0.1 percent. The AMD part competes in a slightly higher performance tier.

Both GPUs are end-of-life products from early 2014. They are integrated into portable devices and cannot be upgraded independently. Their launch MSRP is not recorded in the database, so no cost comparison is available.

The final recommendation depends on the workload. For OpenCL compute, pick the AMD Radeon R5 M230. For Vulkan support and higher rasterization throughput metrics, pick the NVIDIA GeForce 830M. The benchmark data does not support a universal winner, but it does provide clear guidance for specific use cases. Users who run OpenCL applications should favor AMD, while users who run Vulkan titles or value higher pixel and texture rates should favor NVIDIA.