AMD Radeon R5 M230 vs NVIDIA GeForce MX110 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded benchmark data separates these two mobile graphics parts into distinct roles, though the margin is not enormous. The AMD Radeon R5 M230 claims the only direct head-to-head victory in the database, winning the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 4577 against the NVIDIA GeForce MX110's 4255, a 7.6% advantage. That single win positions the R5 M230 as the stronger compute-oriented part in this pairing, at least for workloads that scale through OpenCL.

The NVIDIA GeForce MX110, despite losing the OpenCL comparison, shows its own strengths in the broader data. It carries a Vulkan benchmark score of 3413, something the AMD part lacks entirely in the database. This means the MX110 has a measurable path for modern cross-platform graphics APIs, while the R5 M230 has no recorded Vulkan result to compare. For applications that lean on Vulkan, the MX110 is the only one of the two with demonstrated capability.

Looking at average benchmark scores, the AMD part posts 4577, while the MX110 averages 3834 when both OpenCL and Vulkan results are included. That average is dragged down by the Vulkan score, but it still reflects a real difference: the R5 M230 is more consistent in its single recorded metric, while the MX110 has a wider spread across different API workloads. The percentile rankings reinforce this split. The R5 M230 sits at the 27th percentile of all GPUs, while the MX110 sits at the 23rd percentile. Neither is a high performer, but the AMD chip ranks slightly higher overall.

The nearest rivals for each part clarify the competitive landscape. The R5 M230 sits within 1.1% of the AMD Radeon RX 560 (4569, 0.2% behind), the Intel HD Graphics P530 (4560, 0.4% ahead), the NVIDIA Quadro M3000M (4621, 0.9% behind), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M (4628, 1.1% behind). This cluster shows the R5 M230 performing in line with a range of mid-tier desktop and mobile parts from several generations. The MX110, by contrast, sits within 1.6% of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 (3823, 0.3% ahead), the Intel UHD Graphics 710 (3792, 1.1% ahead), the AMD Radeon R5 Graphics (3883, 1.2% behind), and the NVIDIA Quadro 2000 (3898, 1.6% behind). That rival set is generally lower-performing, which explains the MX110's lower percentile placement.

Architecture Differences

The two chips come from different architectural lineages and different eras of mobile computing. The AMD Radeon R5 M230 uses the GCN 1.0 architecture on a chip codenamed Jet, built on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It packs 690 million transistors into a 56 mm² die. The NVIDIA GeForce MX110 uses the Maxwell architecture on a chip called GM108S, also on a 28 nm TSMC process, but with 1,020 million transistors across a 77 mm² die. The density difference is small: 12.3 million transistors per mm² for the AMD chip, 13.2 million per mm² for the NVIDIA chip.

The compute resources differ in configuration. The R5 M230 carries 320 shading units, 20 texture mapping units, and 8 raster operation units. The MX110 has 256 shading units, 16 texture mapping units, and 8 raster operation units. Despite fewer shaders and TMUs, the MX110 achieves higher pixel and texture rates. Its pixel rate is 8.048 GPixel/s versus 4.880 GPixel/s for the AMD part, and its texture rate is 16.10 GTexel/s versus 12.20 GTexel/s. The floating-point throughput tells a similar story: the MX110 reaches 515.1 GFLOPS, while the R5 M230 manages 390.4 GFLOPS.

Memory is a major differentiator. Both use a 64-bit bus and 2 GB of memory, but the type and speed differ. The R5 M230 uses DDR3 at 1000 MHz (2 Gbps effective), yielding 16.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The MX110 uses GDDR5 at 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective), yielding 40.10 GB/s. That is a 2.5x bandwidth advantage for the NVIDIA part, which likely explains why it can achieve higher fill rates with fewer compute units.

Clock behavior also differs. The R5 M230 has no recorded base or boost clock in the database. The MX110 runs at a 978 MHz base and 1006 MHz boost. The AMD part's memory clock is set at 1000 MHz, while the NVIDIA memory runs at 1253 MHz.

Other differences are more subtle. The bus interface differs: PCIe 3.0 x8 for the AMD part, PCIe 3.0 x4 for the NVIDIA part. The R5 M230 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), while the MX110 supports DirectX 12 (11_0). Both support OpenGL 4.6. Vulkan support is recorded as 1.2.170 for the AMD part and 1.4 for the NVIDIA part, though only the MX110 has a Vulkan benchmark score. The power situation is only documented for the MX110, which lists a 30 W TDP and no power connectors. The AMD part has no TDP listed.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains exactly one direct head-to-head benchmark between these two parts: Geekbench OpenCL. The AMD Radeon R5 M230 scored 4577, the NVIDIA GeForce MX110 scored 4255, and the AMD part won by 7.6%. This is a meaningful margin in the context of these low-power mobile GPUs, though it is far from dominant.

The OpenCL result is worth examining against the architectural specs. The MX110 has higher FP32 throughput (515.1 GFLOPS vs 390.4 GFLOPS), higher texture rate (16.10 GTexel/s vs 12.20 GTexel/s), and higher pixel rate (8.048 GPixel/s vs 4.880 GPixel/s). Yet it loses the OpenCL test. This suggests that raw throughput metrics do not fully predict OpenCL performance, or that the AMD GCN architecture handles this particular workload more efficiently. The R5 M230's larger count of shading units (320 vs 256) may play a role in compute-oriented tasks that scale with shader count rather than raw clock speed.

The MX110's Vulkan score of 3413 has no direct AMD counterpart in the database. Comparing it to the R5 M230's OpenCL score of 4577 is not apples-to-apples, but it does indicate that the MX110's compute capability drops considerably when moving from OpenCL to Vulkan. The 3413 Vulkan result is about 20% lower than its own OpenCL score, which suggests the MX110 is better optimized for OpenCL workloads.

The nearest rival data provides additional context for both parts' benchmark positions. The R5 M230's OpenCL score sits just 0.2% above the AMD Radeon RX 560, a part with a much larger specification sheet, and 0.4% above the Intel HD Graphics P530. It trails the NVIDIA Quadro M3000M by 0.9% and the GeForce GTX 970M by 1.1%. These are all close margins, placing the R5 M230 in a tight performance cluster. The MX110's average score of 3834 sits 0.3% above the GeForce GTX 650, 1.1% above the Intel UHD Graphics 710, and 1.2% to 1.6% below the AMD Radeon R5 Graphics and Quadro 2000. This cluster is roughly 15% lower in absolute terms than the R5 M230's cluster.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear but nuanced conclusion. The AMD Radeon R5 M230 is the stronger part for OpenCL compute workloads. It wins the only direct benchmark in the database by 7.6%, and its average benchmark score of 4577 places it at the 27th percentile of all GPUs, four points higher than the MX110's 23rd percentile. For anyone running OpenCL-based applications, the R5 M230 is the safer choice.

The NVIDIA GeForce MX110 is the better option for Vulkan-capable workloads. It has a recorded Vulkan score of 3413, and the R5 M230 has no Vulkan result at all. The MX110 also offers significantly higher memory bandwidth at 40.10 GB/s versus 16.00 GB/s, which matters for texture-heavy and bandwidth-sensitive tasks. Its higher pixel and texture rates suggest better raw fill performance, even if the OpenCL benchmark does not reflect that advantage.

For general-purpose mobile use, the MX110's higher FP32 throughput (515.1 GFLOPS), higher clocks (978 MHz base, 1006 MHz boost), and documented 30 W TDP make it a more complete package on paper. But the R5 M230's better benchmark score and higher percentile rank mean it should not be dismissed. The choice depends on the workload: OpenCL compute favors AMD, Vulkan and bandwidth favor NVIDIA.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher Geekbench OpenCL score?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M230 scores 4577, while the NVIDIA GeForce MX110 scores 4255. The AMD part wins by 7.6%.

Q: Does the NVIDIA GeForce MX110 support Vulkan?

A: Yes, it has a recorded Geekbench Vulkan score of 3413 and lists Vulkan API support as version 1.4.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference between the two?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M230 has 16.00 GB/s of bandwidth using DDR3 memory, while the NVIDIA GeForce MX110 has 40.10 GB/s using GDDR5 memory.

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

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M230 sits at the 27th percentile of all GPUs, while the NVIDIA GeForce MX110 sits at the 23rd percentile.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M230 has 320 shading units, while the NVIDIA GeForce MX110 has 256 shading units.

Q: What is the transistor count for each chip?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M230 uses 690 million transistors on a 56 mm² die, while the NVIDIA GeForce MX110 uses 1,020 million transistors on a 77 mm² die.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon R5 M230 | NVIDIA GeForce MX110 |

|---|---|---|

| Chip | Jet | GM108S |

| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Maxwell |

| Generation | Gem System (R5 M200) | GeForce MX (1xx) |

| Transistors | 690 million | 1,020 million |

| Die Size | 56 mm² | 77 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 12.3M / mm² | 13.2M / mm² |

| Base Clock | None recorded | 978 MHz |

| Boost Clock | None recorded | 1006 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1000 MHz (2 Gbps effective) | 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Type | DDR3 | GDDR5 |

| Memory Bandwidth | 16.00 GB/s | 40.10 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 320 | 256 |

| TMUs | 20 | 16 |

| Pixel Rate | 4.880 GPixel/s | 8.048 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 12.20 GTexel/s | 16.10 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 390.4 GFLOPS | 515.1 GFLOPS |

| TDP | Not recorded | 30 W |

| Power Connectors | Not recorded | None |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x4 |

| DirectX | 12 (11_1) | 12 (11_0) |

| Vulkan | 1.2.170 | 1.4 |

| Release Date | 2014-01-06 | 2017-11-16 |

| Production Status | End-of-life | End-of-life |

| OpenCL Benchmark | 4577 | 4255 |

| Vulkan Benchmark | None recorded | 3413 |

| Average Benchmark Score | 4577 | 3834 |

| Percentile vs All GPUs | 27 | 23 |