AMD Radeon R5 M230 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTS 450 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The NVIDIA GeForce GTS 450 takes the only head-to-head benchmark in the data, and it does so by a decisive margin. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the GTS 450 scores 4,893 points against the AMD Radeon R5 M230’s 4,577 points. That is a 6.9% advantage for the NVIDIA card, a lead large enough to be meaningful in compute-oriented workloads. The GTS 450 wins this comparison 1–0; there are no benchmark categories in which the R5 M230 comes out ahead.

The percentile rankings place both parts near the bottom of the GPU landscape, but the GTS 450 still edges out its rival. The NVIDIA card sits at the 28th percentile of all GPUs, while the AMD part sits at the 27th. That one-percentile gap reflects a real, if modest, performance separation. The data shows a consistent pattern: the GTS 450 is the stronger compute performer, even if neither card is competitive with modern hardware.

When placed against their nearest rivals, both cards show how narrow their performance windows are. The GTS 450’s average benchmark score of 4,893 is only 0.2% behind the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 8 GB (4,901) and 0.2% behind the AMD FirePro W5130M (4,904). It is 0.5% ahead of the AMD Radeon R6 M255DX (4,867) and 0.7% behind the AMD Radeon R7 M265 (4,929). The R5 M230’s 4,577 average places it 0.2% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 560 (4,569) and 0.4% ahead of the Intel HD Graphics P530 (4,560), while sitting 0.9% behind the NVIDIA Quadro M3000M (4,621) and 1.1% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M (4,628). These deltaPct values are small, but they consistently favor the GTS 450 in the direct comparison.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins the Geekbench OpenCL benchmark?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTS 450 wins with a score of 4,893 versus the AMD Radeon R5 M230’s 4,577, a 6.9% advantage.

Q: How do the two cards compare in overall GPU percentile rankings?

A: The GTS 450 sits at the 28th percentile of all GPUs, while the R5 M230 sits at the 27th percentile, a one-point gap favoring NVIDIA.

Q: Which card has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The GTS 450 has significantly higher memory bandwidth at 57.73 GB/s, compared to the R5 M230’s 16.00 GB/s, despite the AMD card having double the memory capacity (2 GB versus 1 GB).

Q: What are the memory types and bus widths of each card?

A: The GTS 450 uses 1 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, while the R5 M230 uses 2 GB of DDR3 memory on a 64-bit bus.

Q: Which card has a higher transistor density?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M230 has a transistor density of 12.3M per mm², more than double the GTS 450’s 4.9M per mm², due to its smaller 28 nm process node.

Q: What is the DirectX support difference?

A: The GTS 450 supports DirectX 12 (11_0), while the R5 M230 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), giving the AMD part a slightly newer feature level.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is substantial, reflecting their different design eras. The NVIDIA GeForce GTS 450 is built on the Fermi architecture, using the GF106 chip manufactured on a 40 nm process at TSMC. It packs 1,170 million transistors into a 238 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 4.9M per mm². The AMD Radeon R5 M230, by contrast, uses the GCN 1.0 architecture with the Jet chip, fabricated on a 28 nm process, also at TSMC. It contains 690 million transistors on a much smaller 56 mm² die, achieving a transistor density of 12.3M per mm². The newer process node allows AMD to pack transistors more densely, but the NVIDIA chip has nearly 70% more total transistors.

The compute resources are organized differently. The GTS 450 has 192 shading units, 32 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 16 render output units (ROPs). The R5 M230 has 320 shading units, which is 66% more, but only 20 TMUs and 8 ROPs. This means the AMD card has more shader cores for parallel compute, but the NVIDIA card has a wider texture pipeline and double the ROP count. The pixel rate reflects this: the GTS 450 achieves 6.264 GPixel/s versus the R5 M230’s 4.880 GPixel/s. The texture rate is also higher on NVIDIA, at 25.06 GTexel/s versus 12.20 GTexel/s.

Floating-point performance tells a similar story. The GTS 450 delivers 601.3 GFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the R5 M230 delivers 390.4 GFLOPS. That is a 54% advantage for the NVIDIA card. Neither GPU has RT cores or tensor cores, and both lack FP16 support. The memory subsystems are radically different: the GTS 450 uses GDDR5 with a 128-bit bus, while the R5 M230 uses DDR3 with a 64-bit bus. The effective memory clock is 3.6 Gbps on NVIDIA versus 2 Gbps on AMD, and the resulting bandwidth gap is enormous — 57.73 GB/s versus 16.00 GB/s.

API support differs in one key area. Both cards support DirectX 12 and OpenGL 4.6, but the GTS 450 is limited to DirectX 12 (11_0), while the R5 M230 supports DirectX 12 (11_1). The AMD card also has Vulkan support (version 1.2.170), while the NVIDIA card has no listed Vulkan support. The GTS 450 uses a PCIe 2.0 x16 interface, while the R5 M230 uses PCIe 3.0 x8.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every measurable specification. The GTS 450 is a dual-slot, 210 mm long card (8.3 inches) with a 111 mm height (4.4 inches), requiring a 1x 6-pin power connector and a 300 W suggested PSU. The R5 M230 is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with no dimensions listed, no power connectors, and no suggested PSU — it is designed for portable devices, as indicated by its display outputs being "Portable Device Dependent." The NVIDIA card has display outputs of 2x DVI and 1x mini-HDMI 1.3a.

Memory configuration is a major differentiator. The GTS 450 has 1024 MB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, while the R5 M230 has 2 GB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus. The effective memory clock is 902 MHz (3.6 Gbps) on NVIDIA versus 1000 MHz (2 Gbps) on AMD. The GTS 450’s TDP is 106 W, while the R5 M230 has no TDP listed, consistent with its mobile IGP nature.

The release dates are separated by more than three years: the GTS 450 launched on September 12, 2010, and the R5 M230 on January 6, 2014. The NVIDIA card had a launch MSRP of 129 USD. The GTS 450’s predecessor is the GeForce 200 series and its successor is the GeForce 500 series. The R5 M230’s predecessor is the Solar System series and its successor is Polaris Mobile. Both are end-of-life products.

The shading unit counts differ significantly, with the R5 M230 having 320 shading units versus 192 on the GTS 450. However, the TMU count is higher on NVIDIA (32 versus 20), and the ROP count is double (16 versus 8). The GTS 450 has a higher pixel rate (6.264 GPixel/s versus 4.880 GPixel/s) and a higher texture rate (25.06 GTexel/s versus 12.20 GTexel/s). The FP32 compute is also higher on NVIDIA (601.3 GFLOPS versus 390.4 GFLOPS).

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the NVIDIA GeForce GTS 450 is the faster GPU in compute performance. It wins the only head-to-head test by 6.9%, holds a one-point higher percentile ranking (28th versus 27th), and delivers 54% more FP32 compute. The GTS 450 also has vastly superior memory bandwidth — 57.73 GB/s versus 16.00 GB/s — which directly impacts texture-heavy and bandwidth-sensitive workloads. For any user prioritizing raw performance, the GTS 450 is the clear choice from this data.

However, the R5 M230 is not without its own advantages. It is an integrated GPU with no power connector requirements, no TDP figure, and no dimensions — it is designed to be embedded in portable devices. The GTS 450, by contrast, is a dual-slot card requiring a 6-pin power connector and a 300 W PSU. The R5 M230 also has double the memory capacity (2 GB versus 1 GB), a newer architecture (GCN 1.0 versus Fermi), a smaller process node (28 nm versus 40 nm), and support for Vulkan 1.2.170, which the GTS 450 lacks entirely. It also has a slightly newer DirectX feature level (12 (11_1) versus 12 (11_0)).

The choice between these two depends entirely on the use case. The GTS 450 is a discrete card that demands system resources but delivers better compute and memory performance. The R5 M230 is a power-efficient integrated solution with no external power needs, but it sacrifices performance significantly. The data shows the GTS 450 wins the performance battle decisively, while the R5 M230 wins on integration and modern API support.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA GeForce GTS 450 wins in every performance metric where the two are directly compared. The Geekbench OpenCL score of 4,893 versus 4,577 gives it a 6.9% edge in compute workloads. Its memory bandwidth advantage — 57.73 GB/s versus 16.00 GB/s — means it is better suited for any application that moves large amounts of data, such as texture streaming or compute shaders. The higher pixel rate (6.264 GPixel/s versus 4.880 GPixel/s) and texture rate (25.06 GTexel/s versus 12.20 GTexel/s) make it the stronger choice for rendering tasks. The FP32 output of 601.3 GFLOPS versus 390.4 GFLOPS reinforces this pattern.

The AMD Radeon R5 M230 wins in areas related to integration and modern feature support. Its 320 shading units give it more parallel compute cores, even though it cannot translate that into higher overall performance. The 2 GB memory capacity is double the GTS 450’s 1 GB, which could help in applications that require larger memory pools, though the narrow 64-bit bus and DDR3 type severely limit its bandwidth. The R5 M230’s Vulkan 1.2.170 support and DirectX 12 (11_1) feature level are more modern than the GTS 450’s lack of Vulkan and DirectX 12 (11_0). Its 28 nm process node and higher transistor density (12.3M per mm² versus 4.9M per mm²) indicate a more efficient design, and the absence of any power connector or TDP listing makes it suitable for mobile and low-power environments.

For a desktop system with a PSU and space for a dual-slot card, the GTS 450 is the clear pick based on performance. For a portable device or a system where power draw and physical footprint are constraints, the R5 M230 is the only viable option. The data does not support any scenario where the R5 M230 outperforms the GTS 450 in compute, but it does offer capabilities the NVIDIA card simply lacks.