AMD Radeon R5 M240 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M and AMD Radeon R5 M240 occupy the same percentile ranking, but the similarity ends there. The GTX 680M delivers a 32.3% higher average benchmark score, driven by a substantially larger GPU and memory subsystem, while the R5 M240 counters with a more modern API feature set and higher clock speeds. The data positions the GTX 680M as the clear performance leader, with the R5 M240 serving as a lower-power, smaller-die alternative.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M scores 7023, which is 0.7% higher than the AMD Radeon R5 M240's 6975. In the head-to-head OpenCL test, the GTX 680M wins by 32.3% (9230 vs 6975).

Q: What are the memory specifications of each card?

A: The GTX 680M uses 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 115.2 GB/s bandwidth. The R5 M240 uses 1024 MB of DDR3 memory on a 64-bit bus, delivering 14.40 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: How do their transistor counts compare?

A: The GTX 680M's GK104 chip contains 3,540 million transistors on a 294 mm² die. The R5 M240's Jet chip contains 690 million transistors on a 56 mm² die. Both use a 28 nm TSMC process.

Q: Which GPU supports a newer DirectX version?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M240 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M supports DirectX 12 (11_0). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan, with the GTX 680M having Vulkan 1.2.175 vs the R5 M240's 1.2.170.

Q: What is the clock speed difference?

A: The R5 M240 has a higher base clock of 1000 MHz and boost clock of 1030 MHz. The GTX 680M runs at 719 MHz base and 758 MHz boost. Despite lower clocks, the GTX 680M achieves far higher throughput due to its larger core.

Q: How do the nearest rivals compare for each card?

A: For the GTX 680M, its closest rival is the NVIDIA T600 (7035, -0.2% delta). For the R5 M240, its closest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M (6946, 0.4% delta). The two cards themselves are within 0.7% of each other in average score.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gulf between these two mobile GPUs is vast. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M uses the GK104 chip based on the Kepler architecture, fabricated by TSMC on a 28 nm process. It packs 3,540 million transistors into a 294 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 12.0M per mm². The AMD Radeon R5 M240 uses the Jet chip based on GCN 1.0, also on TSMC's 28 nm node, but with only 690 million transistors on a 56 mm² die. Its transistor density is slightly higher at 12.3M per mm², but the absolute scale is dramatically smaller.

The compute resources reflect this disparity. The GTX 680M contains 1344 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The R5 M240 is configured with 320 shading units, 20 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. In terms of raw throughput, the GTX 680M delivers 2.038 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, 84.90 GTexel/s of texture fill, and 21.22 GPixel/s of pixel fill. The R5 M240 manages 659.2 GFLOPS, 20.60 GTexel/s, and 8.240 GPixel/s respectively. The GTX 680M leads in every throughput metric by margins ranging from roughly 3x to 4x.

Memory architecture reinforces the performance hierarchy. The GTX 680M uses 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, achieving 115.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The R5 M240 uses 1024 MB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus, achieving only 14.40 GB/s. That is an 8x difference in memory bandwidth. The GTX 680M's memory runs at 900 MHz with 3.6 Gbps effective data rate, while the R5 M240's memory also runs at 900 MHz but at 1800 Mbps effective. The bus width is the dominant factor. The GTX 680M uses an MXM-B (3.0) bus interface, while the R5 M240 uses PCIe 3.0 x8. The GTX 680M's TDP is listed at 100 W; the R5 M240 has no TDP listed.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M wins decisively in raw performance benchmarks. In the single head-to-head test available, Geekbench OpenCL, the GTX 680M scores 9230 against the R5 M240's 6975, a 32.3% lead. It also has a higher average benchmark score of 7023 vs 6975. The GTX 680M's specifications suggest it is designed for demanding workloads: 4 GB of fast GDDR5 memory, a 256-bit memory bus, and 1344 shading units make it suitable for high-resolution gaming or GPU compute tasks.

The AMD Radeon R5 M240 wins in the efficiency-per-transistor comparison. Its transistor density of 12.3M / mm² is marginally higher than the GTX 680M's 12.0M / mm². It also operates at significantly higher clock speeds: 1000 MHz base and 1030 MHz boost, versus 719 MHz and 758 MHz for the GTX 680M. The R5 M240's smaller die size of 56 mm² suggests lower power consumption, though no TDP figure is listed. Its newer DirectX 12 (11_1) support gives it a slight API advantage over the GTX 680M's DirectX 12 (11_0). The R5 M240 also has a PCIe 3.0 x8 interface, which is a more standard system connection than the GTX 680M's MXM-B (3.0) module slot.

Neither GPU wins on production status — both are end-of-life. The GTX 680M was released in 2012 and is part of the GeForce 600M generation. The R5 M240 was released in 2014 and belongs to the Gem System (R5 M200) generation. The GTX 680M has a successor in the GeForce 700M, while the R5 M240's successor is Polaris Mobile. The GTX 680M's predecessor is GeForce 500M, and the R5 M240's predecessor is Solar System.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every measurable specification:

• Chip: GK104 (GTX 680M) vs Jet (R5 M240)
• Architecture: Kepler vs GCN 1.0
• Generation: GeForce 600M vs Gem System (R5 M200)
• Transistors: 3,540 million vs 690 million
• Die Size: 294 mm² vs 56 mm²
• Transistor Density: 12.0M / mm² vs 12.3M / mm²
• Base Clock: 719 MHz vs 1000 MHz
• Boost Clock: 758 MHz vs 1030 MHz
• Memory Size: 4 GB vs 1024 MB
• Memory Type: GDDR5 vs DDR3
• Memory Bus Width: 256 bit vs 64 bit
• Memory Bandwidth: 115.2 GB/s vs 14.40 GB/s
• Memory Effective Rate: 3.6 Gbps vs 1800 Mbps
• Shading Units: 1344 vs 320
• TMUs: 112 vs 20
• ROPs: 32 vs 8
• Pixel Rate: 21.22 GPixel/s vs 8.240 GPixel/s
• Texture Rate: 84.90 GTexel/s vs 20.60 GTexel/s
• FP32: 2.038 TFLOPS vs 659.2 GFLOPS
• TDP: 100 W vs not listed
• Bus Interface: MXM-B (3.0) vs PCIe 3.0 x8
• DirectX Support: 12 (11_0) vs 12 (11_1)
• Vulkan Version: 1.2.175 vs 1.2.170
• Release Date: 2012-06-03 vs 2014-09-17
• Predecessor: GeForce 500M vs Solar System
• Successor: GeForce 700M vs Polaris Mobile

Notably, the R5 M240 has no listed slot width, power connectors, display outputs, or dimensions, while the GTX 680M is listed as an MXM Module with no power connectors and portable-device-dependent display outputs. Neither card has a launch MSRP listed.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison available is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and it is a landslide. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M scores 9230, while the AMD Radeon R5 M240 scores 6975. That is a 32.3% difference in favor of the GTX 680M. This aligns with the raw specification gap: the GTX 680M has 4.2x more shading units, 5.6x more TMUs, 4x more ROPs, and 8x more memory bandwidth. The R5 M240's higher clock speeds (1000 MHz vs 719 MHz base) cannot compensate for having roughly one-quarter of the compute resources.

The average benchmark scores tell a slightly closer story. The GTX 680M averages 7023 across its benchmark suite, which includes both Geekbench Metal (4815) and Geekbench OpenCL (9230). The R5 M240 averages 6975 from its single OpenCL result. The GTX 680M's average is 0.7% higher. The GTX 680M's nearest rival is the NVIDIA T600 with an average score of 7035, a -0.2% delta, meaning the T600 is essentially tied with the GTX 680M. The R5 M240's nearest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M at 6946, a 0.4% delta in favor of the R5 M240.

Both GPUs sit at the 39th percentile among all GPUs. This means they are mid-pack performers overall, but the GTX 680M achieves that percentile with far older hardware (2012 vs 2014 release) and a much larger silicon footprint. The GTX 680M also edges out the GeForce GTX 675M (6946) by 1.1% in average score, while the R5 M240 beats the same card by 0.4%. Against the AMD FirePro M5100 (6830), the R5 M240 leads by 2.1%.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680M is the superior performer. It wins the only head-to-head benchmark by 32.3%, has a higher average benchmark score (7023 vs 6975), and leads in every specification that matters for compute and rendering throughput. Its 4 GB GDDR5 memory with 115.2 GB/s bandwidth is in a different class from the R5 M240's 1 GB DDR3 at 14.40 GB/s. Anyone prioritizing raw GPU performance should choose the GTX 680M.

The AMD Radeon R5 M240 has a narrower set of advantages. It offers a newer DirectX version (12 (11_1) vs 12 (11_0)), a slightly higher transistor density (12.3M vs 12.0M per mm²), and higher clock speeds (1000 MHz vs 719 MHz base). Its 56 mm² die is far smaller than the GTX 680M's 294 mm², implying lower manufacturing cost and likely lower power draw, though no TDP is listed for the R5 M240. The R5 M240 also uses a standard PCIe 3.0 x8 interface, which may be easier to integrate into a conventional laptop design than the GTX 680M's MXM-B module.

For gaming or GPU-accelerated workloads, the GTX 680M is the clear pick. Its 1344 shading units and 2.038 TFLOPS of FP32 performance dwarf the R5 M240's 320 shading units and 659.2 GFLOPS. For a light-duty laptop GPU where power efficiency and small die size are paramount, the R5 M240 offers a more modest but adequate feature set. The GTX 680M is end-of-life, as is the R5 M240, so neither represents a future-proof investment. The benchmark data shows a 32.3% performance gap that no amount of clock speed advantage can close. The GTX 680M wins 1-0 in the head-to-head comparison, and that single result is consistent with the broader specification sheet.