AMD Radeon R5 M240 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670M Comparison

AMD Radeon R5 M240 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670M are two end-of-life mobile graphics solutions from different eras, with the AMD part arriving roughly two and a half years after the NVIDIA chip. The benchmark data shows a single head-to-head comparison where the AMD Radeon R5 M240 edges out the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670M by 7.1% in the Geekbench OpenCL test, scoring 6975 against 6513. However, the surrounding context from nearest rivals and architectural specifications reveals a more nuanced picture, where the NVIDIA part’s older design still holds advantages in raw throughput metrics like texture and pixel fill rates. This analysis walks through the data to determine where each GPU wins, how they stack up in specifications, and what the architecture differences mean for real-world use cases.

Where Each One Wins

Based strictly on the benchmark results, the AMD Radeon R5 M240 wins the only available head-to-head test, the Geekbench OpenCL compute benchmark. Its score of 6975 is 7.1% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670M’s 6513, giving AMD a single victory in the wins column (1 win vs 0 for NVIDIA). This suggests that for general-purpose compute workloads measured by OpenCL, such as physics simulations, video encoding, or data processing, the AMD part has a measurable edge in this specific test environment.

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670M, despite losing the compute benchmark, does not win any direct comparisons in the provided data. However, its nearest rival list shows it performs competitively within its own performance tier, sitting at the 38th percentile of all GPUs compared to AMD's 39th percentile. The NVIDIA part’s strengths appear more in traditional graphics throughput metrics derived from its specifications rather than in the single benchmark provided. For instance, the GTX 670M’s texture rate of 33.49 GTexel/s is substantially higher than the R5 M240’s 20.60 GTexel/s, which would benefit games and applications that are texture-heavy. Similarly, its pixel rate of 8.372 GPixel/s slightly exceeds AMD’s 8.240 GPixel/s, indicating a marginal advantage in fill-rate-bound scenarios like high-resolution rendering with simple shaders.

The use-case split, therefore, leans toward AMD for compute-oriented tasks as measured by Geekbench OpenCL, while NVIDIA holds theoretical advantages in rasterization-heavy workloads based on its higher TMU and ROP counts. The data does not include gaming benchmarks, so any claims about gaming performance must be inferred from these architectural metrics. The AMD Radeon R5 M240 also has a higher FP32 throughput at 659.2 GFLOPS compared to the GTX 670M’s 803.7 GFLOPS—wait, that actually shows NVIDIA higher. Correcting: the GTX 670M’s FP32 is 803.7 GFLOPS vs AMD’s 659.2 GFLOPS, so NVIDIA wins in raw compute shader performance despite losing the OpenCL test. This discrepancy suggests that the OpenCL benchmark may favor AMD’s architecture in specific execution patterns, but the raw numbers indicate NVIDIA has higher peak compute capability.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher benchmark score in the head-to-head test?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M240 scores 6975 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 7.1% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670M’s 6513. This makes AMD the winner of that single test.

Q: How does the AMD Radeon R5 M240 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M240’s average benchmark score of 6975 places it 0.4% above the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M (6946), 0.7% below the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M (7023), 0.8% below the NVIDIA T600 (7035), and 2.1% above the AMD FirePro M5100 (6830). Its 39th percentile ranking shows it sits in the lower-middle range of all GPUs.

Q: What is the performance gap between the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670M and its closest competitor?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670M’s score of 6513 is 0.3% above the NVIDIA GeForce GT 555M (6493), 0.5% above the NVIDIA Quadro M5000M (6481), 0.6% above the AMD Radeon Vega 10 Mobile (6476), and 0.6% below the Intel UHD Graphics P750 (6554). This places it at the 38th percentile of all GPUs, indicating near-average performance.

Q: Which GPU has a higher memory bandwidth?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670M has a memory bandwidth of 72.00 GB/s, which is exactly five times higher than the AMD Radeon R5 M240’s 14.40 GB/s. This is due to the GTX 670M’s 192-bit bus width and GDDR5 memory type versus AMD’s 64-bit bus and DDR3.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon R5 M240 support Vulkan?

A: Yes, the AMD Radeon R5 M240 supports Vulkan 1.2.170 and DirectX 12 (11_1). The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670M supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6 but has no listed Vulkan support, making AMD more future-proof for modern APIs.

Q: What are the transistor counts of these two GPUs?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M240 has 690 million transistors on a 56 mm² die, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670M has 1,950 million transistors on a 332 mm² die. The NVIDIA chip uses nearly three times more transistors but also has a much larger die area.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only benchmark provided in the head-to-head data is Geekbench OpenCL, where the AMD Radeon R5 M240 scores 6975 against the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670M’s 6513, resulting in a 7.1% delta in AMD’s favor. This is a modest but clear victory for AMD in raw compute performance as measured by this test. The score difference of 462 points is notable but not overwhelming, suggesting that the two GPUs are in the same performance class despite their architectural differences.

Looking at the nearest rival data for context, the AMD Radeon R5 M240’s score of 6975 puts it just below the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M (7023) and NVIDIA T600 (7035), with deltas of -0.7% and -0.8% respectively. This means the AMD part is competitive with higher-tier NVIDIA mobile GPUs from the same era. Conversely, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670M’s score of 6513 is closest to the Intel UHD Graphics P750 (6554), with a delta of -0.6%, and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 555M (6493), with a delta of 0.3%. This indicates that the GTX 670M performs near the level of integrated graphics in this specific compute test, which is surprising given its dedicated GPU status.

The single head-to-head result favors AMD, but the specification data tells a different story for other workloads. The NVIDIA GTX 670M has a texture rate of 33.49 GTexel/s, which is 62.6% higher than the AMD R5 M240’s 20.60 GTexel/s. Similarly, its pixel rate of 8.372 GPixel/s slightly exceeds AMD’s 8.240 GPixel/s. These metrics suggest that for traditional 3D rendering, the NVIDIA part would likely outperform AMD due to its higher TMU count (56 vs 20) and ROP count (24 vs 8). The FP32 performance also favors NVIDIA at 803.7 GFLOPS versus 659.2 GFLOPS, a 21.9% advantage. Yet the OpenCL benchmark shows AMD winning, which could indicate that the test is memory-bandwidth-bound or that AMD’s GCN architecture handles the specific workload more efficiently.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ significantly across nearly every specification category. The AMD Radeon R5 M240 uses a 28 nm process node with 690 million transistors on a 56 mm² die, achieving a transistor density of 12.3M per mm². The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670M uses a 40 nm node with 1,950 million transistors on a 332 mm² die, with a density of 5.9M per mm². This means AMD’s chip is much smaller and more densely packed, while NVIDIA’s is physically larger with more transistors overall.

Memory configurations are starkly different. The AMD part has 1024 MB of DDR3 memory on a 64-bit bus, yielding 14.40 GB/s bandwidth. The NVIDIA part has 1536 MB of GDDR5 memory on a 192-bit bus, providing 72.00 GB/s bandwidth—exactly five times more. The AMD GPU’s memory clock is 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective), while NVIDIA’s is 750 MHz (3 Gbps effective). The NVIDIA card also has a higher memory capacity by 512 MB.

Compute unit counts show NVIDIA leading: 336 shading units vs AMD’s 320, 56 TMUs vs 20, and 24 ROPs vs 8. The clock speeds differ with AMD having a base of 1000 MHz and boost of 1030 MHz, while NVIDIA has no listed base or boost clocks. The bus interface also varies: AMD uses PCIe 3.0 x8, while NVIDIA uses MXM-B (3.0) with a slot width of MXM Module. NVIDIA’s TDP is listed at 75 W with no power connectors, while AMD’s TDP is not provided.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide is generational and fundamental. The AMD Radeon R5 M240 is built on GCN 1.0 architecture with a chip codenamed Jet, part of the Gem System (R5 M200) generation. It was released on September 17, 2014, and its predecessor is the Solar System series with a successor of Polaris Mobile. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670M uses Fermi 2.0 architecture with the GF114 chip, from the GeForce 600M generation, released on March 21, 2012. Its predecessor is GeForce 500M and successor is GeForce 700M.

The process technology shows AMD on 28 nm versus NVIDIA on 40 nm, giving AMD a density advantage. The transistor density of 12.3M/mm² for AMD is more than double NVIDIA’s 5.9M/mm². In terms of API support, AMD lists Vulkan 1.2.170 and DirectX 12 (11_1), while NVIDIA lists DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6 but no Vulkan. Both support OpenGL 4.6. NVIDIA’s display outputs are listed as "Portable Device Dependent," while AMD’s are not provided, indicating a difference in how they’re integrated into laptops.

The NVIDIA part’s 75 W TDP and MXM module form factor suggest it was designed as a more powerful, replaceable mobile GPU, whereas AMD’s lack of TDP and power connector data implies a lower-power, soldered design. The GTX 670M’s higher shader count (336 vs 320) and much higher TMU/ROP counts (56/24 vs 20/8) reflect a more graphics-oriented architecture that was designed for gaming in 2012, while the R5 M240’s GCN architecture was aimed at efficiency and compute tasks in 2014.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the data, the AMD Radeon R5 M240 wins the only direct benchmark comparison, taking the Geekbench OpenCL test by 7.1% with a score of 6975 against the GTX 670M’s 6513. This makes AMD the better choice for users prioritizing compute workloads that resemble OpenCL tasks, such as GPU-accelerated applications in productivity or scientific contexts. Its newer GCN architecture also brings Vulkan support and a more modern DirectX feature level (11_1 vs 11_0), which could matter for software compatibility with newer titles or APIs.

However, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670M holds significant specification advantages that suggest better traditional graphics performance. Its 72.00 GB/s memory bandwidth is five times higher than AMD’s 14.40 GB/s, it has nearly three times the TMUs (56 vs 20) and three times the ROPs (24 vs 8), and its FP32 throughput is 21.9% higher at 803.7 GFLOPS. For gaming or other rasterization-heavy workloads, these metrics strongly indicate NVIDIA would outperform AMD, even though no direct gaming benchmark is provided. The GTX 670M’s higher memory capacity (1536 MB vs 1024 MB) also helps with larger textures and higher resolutions.

The choice depends on the workload. If the user’s primary use is compute-oriented applications that mirror the Geekbench OpenCL test, the AMD Radeon R5 M240 is the data-backed winner with a 7.1% advantage. If the user needs a GPU for gaming or graphics rendering, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670M’s superior fill rates, texture throughput, and memory bandwidth make it the logical pick from the available specifications. The AMD part is more efficient per transistor and has modern API support, but the NVIDIA part offers raw graphical power that the benchmark numbers alone do not capture. For a balanced assessment, the AMD wins the compute test, while NVIDIA wins on theoretical graphics capability—users should align their choice with their primary application type.