AMD Radeon R5 M230 vs NVIDIA GeForce 840M Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records a single direct benchmark comparison between the NVIDIA GeForce 840M and the AMD Radeon R5 M230: the Geekbench OpenCL test. In this test, the NVIDIA GeForce 840M scores 5764 points, while the AMD Radeon R5 M230 scores 4577 points. That is a 25.9% advantage for the NVIDIA part, a substantial margin that places the two firmly in different performance classes.

The 25.9% delta is not a marginal victory. It indicates a consistent, broad performance lead for the NVIDIA GeForce 840M in compute workloads. To put that in context, the NVIDIA GeForce 840M's nearest rival in the database, the NVIDIA GeForce 930A, scores 5317 points, which is only 0.1% behind the 840M. The AMD Radeon R5 M230's nearest rival, the AMD Radeon RX 560, scores 4569 points, which is 0.2% behind the R5 M230. So the gap between the two contenders here is roughly comparable to the gap between an entry-level discrete GPU and a much larger desktop part.

The Geekbench Vulkan test also appears for the NVIDIA GeForce 840M, with a score of 4880. The AMD Radeon R5 M230 has no recorded Vulkan score in the database, so no direct comparison is possible on that API. However, the OpenCL result alone is decisive: the NVIDIA part wins the only head-to-head benchmark recorded, giving it 1 win and 0 losses in this comparison.

The average benchmark score tells the same story. The NVIDIA GeForce 840M averages 5322 points across its recorded benchmarks, while the AMD Radeon R5 M230 averages 4577 points. This 745-point gap in average score reinforces the OpenCL result and suggests the NVIDIA part is more consistent across different workloads.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce 840M has an average benchmark score of 5322 points, which is 745 points higher than the AMD Radeon R5 M230's average of 4577 points.

Q: How large is the performance gap in the OpenCL benchmark?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce 840M outscores the AMD Radeon R5 M230 by 25.9% in Geekbench OpenCL, with scores of 5764 and 4577 respectively.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon R5 M230 win any benchmark in this comparison?

A: No. The database records only one head-to-head benchmark, the Geekbench OpenCL test, and the NVIDIA GeForce 840M wins it. The AMD part has 0 wins in this comparison.

Q: How do the two GPUs rank against all other GPUs in the database?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce 840M sits at the 31st percentile among all GPUs, while the AMD Radeon R5 M230 sits at the 27th percentile. The 4-percentile difference reflects the performance gap observed in the benchmarks.

Q: What are the closest rivals for each GPU according to the database?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce 840M's nearest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce 930A, which scores 5317 points, just 0.1% lower. The AMD Radeon R5 M230's nearest rival is the AMD Radeon RX 560, which scores 4569 points, 0.2% lower.

Q: Is there any API support difference that affects benchmark availability?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce 840M supports Vulkan 1.4, while the AMD Radeon R5 M230 supports Vulkan 1.2.170. The NVIDIA part has a recorded Vulkan score of 4880, while the AMD part has no Vulkan benchmark data in the database.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural families, and the data shows clear differences in their designs. The NVIDIA GeForce 840M uses the Maxwell architecture on the GM108S chip, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. The AMD Radeon R5 M230 uses the GCN 1.0 architecture on the Jet chip, also fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. Both use the same process node and the same foundry, so the architectural differences are not a matter of manufacturing technology.

The transistor counts differ significantly. The NVIDIA chip contains 1,020 million transistors on a die size of 77 mm², giving it a transistor density of 13.2 million per square millimeter. The AMD chip contains 690 million transistors on a die size of 56 mm², giving it a transistor density of 12.3 million per square millimeter. The NVIDIA part packs 330 million more transistors into a larger die, and its density is slightly higher.

The shader configurations are also different. The NVIDIA GeForce 840M has 384 shading units, 16 texture mapping units, and 8 render output units. The AMD Radeon R5 M230 has 320 shading units, 20 texture mapping units, and 8 render output units. The NVIDIA part has 64 more shading units, but the AMD part has 4 more texture mapping units. The render output unit count is identical at 8.

These architectural choices lead to very different throughput numbers. The NVIDIA GeForce 840M delivers a pixel rate of 8.992 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 17.98 GTexel/s, while the AMD Radeon R5 M230 delivers 4.880 GPixel/s and 12.20 GTexel/s. The NVIDIA part is roughly 84% faster in pixel throughput and 47% faster in texture throughput.

The FP32 compute figures show the largest disparity. The NVIDIA GeForce 840M achieves 863.2 GFLOPS, while the AMD Radeon R5 M230 achieves 390.4 GFLOPS. The NVIDIA part delivers more than double the single-precision floating-point performance. This is consistent with its higher shading unit count and its higher clock speeds.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs share some basic specifications: both have 2 GB of DDR3 memory, a 64-bit memory bus, and both use a PCIe 3.0 x8 bus interface. Both are integrated-class parts (IGP slot width) with display outputs labeled as portable device dependent. Both are end-of-life products, and neither has a recorded launch MSRP.

The clock speeds differ. The NVIDIA GeForce 840M has a base clock of 1029 MHz and a boost clock of 1124 MHz. The AMD Radeon R5 M230 has no recorded base or boost clock in the database. The memory clocks are nearly identical: the NVIDIA part runs at 1001 MHz with 2 Gbps effective, while the AMD part runs at 1000 MHz with 2 Gbps effective. The resulting memory bandwidth is 16.02 GB/s for the NVIDIA part and 16.00 GB/s for the AMD part, a negligible difference.

The power and physical specifications show some divergence. The NVIDIA GeForce 840M has a TDP of 33 W, while the AMD Radeon R5 M230 has no recorded TDP. Neither part requires external power connectors. The NVIDIA part has no suggested PSU rating, and the AMD part also has no suggested PSU rating.

The API support differs in DirectX and Vulkan versions. The NVIDIA GeForce 840M supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.4, while the AMD Radeon R5 M230 supports DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170. Both support OpenGL 4.6.

The manufacturing details also differ. The NVIDIA chip is 77 mm² with 1,020 million transistors, while the AMD chip is 56 mm² with 690 million transistors. The transistor density is 13.2M per mm² for NVIDIA and 12.3M per mm² for AMD. The release dates are close but not identical: the AMD Radeon R5 M230 was released on 2014-01-06, while the NVIDIA GeForce 840M followed on 2014-03-11.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA GeForce 840M wins the only benchmark recorded, and it wins by a wide margin. Its 25.9% lead in OpenCL performance means it is the clear choice for any workload that relies on general-purpose GPU compute. The 5764 OpenCL score, combined with its 4880 Vulkan score, suggests the NVIDIA part has a broader range of API support and better raw throughput.

The NVIDIA part also wins on raw specification grounds. Its 863.2 GFLOPS FP32 performance is more than double the AMD part's 390.4 GFLOPS. Its pixel rate of 8.992 GPixel/s is nearly double the AMD part's 4.880 GPixel/s. Its texture rate of 17.98 GTexel/s is 47% higher than the AMD part's 12.20 GTexel/s. These numbers indicate that the NVIDIA part is faster at every level of the graphics pipeline.

The AMD Radeon R5 M230 does have a few areas where it is not simply outclassed. It has 20 texture mapping units compared to the NVIDIA part's 16, which gives it a higher texture unit count even though its texture rate is lower. It also has a slightly higher DirectX feature level, supporting DirectX 12 (11_1) compared to the NVIDIA part's DirectX 12 (11_0). Its transistor density is lower but its die size is smaller, which could be a consideration in compact designs.

However, none of these AMD advantages translate into a benchmark win. The AMD part's 0 wins in the head-to-head comparison reflect its position as the slower GPU in this pairing. The 27th percentile ranking among all GPUs, compared to the NVIDIA part's 31st percentile, places the AMD part lower in the global performance distribution.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous. The NVIDIA GeForce 840M outperforms the AMD Radeon R5 M230 by 25.9% in the only benchmark that directly compares them, and it holds a substantial lead in every measured throughput category. The NVIDIA part's 863.2 GFLOPS FP32 performance, 8.992 GPixel/s pixel rate, and 17.98 GTexel/s texture rate all exceed the AMD part's corresponding figures by a wide margin.

The NVIDIA GeForce 840M is the GPU to pick for compute-heavy tasks and for any application that benefits from higher raw graphics throughput. Its 31st percentile ranking and its 5322 average benchmark score put it ahead of the AMD Radeon R5 M230's 27th percentile and 4577 average score. The NVIDIA part also supports Vulkan 1.4, giving it access to newer API features that the AMD part's Vulkan 1.2.170 cannot match.

The AMD Radeon R5 M230 is not without its merits. Its smaller die size of 56 mm² and lower transistor count of 690 million could make it a lower-cost or lower-power option in certain system designs, though no TDP is recorded for it. Its 20 texture mapping units are more than the NVIDIA part's 16, and its DirectX 12 (11_1) support is one feature level higher.

But for anyone choosing between these two based on the recorded data, the NVIDIA GeForce 840M wins on every benchmark and nearly every specification that matters for performance. The AMD Radeon R5 M230's only recorded advantage is in texture unit count and DirectX feature level, neither of which produces a benchmark victory. The verdict from the database is clear: the NVIDIA GeForce 840M is the faster GPU, and the 25.9% OpenCL delta is the single most informative number in this comparison.