AMD Radeon R5 M255 vs NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M Comparison

FAQ

Q: How does the AMD Radeon R5 M255 compare to the NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M in average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M255 holds an average benchmark score of 4788, while the NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M records a lower average of 4033. This places the AMD part at the 28th percentile of all GPUs, versus the 24th percentile for the NVIDIA part.

Q: Which GPU wins in the OpenCL benchmark?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 4934 against the AMD Radeon R5 M255's 4650, a margin of 5.8%.

Q: What are the memory specifications of each card?

A: Both cards have 2 GB of memory on a 128-bit bus. The AMD Radeon R5 M255 uses DDR3 at 1000 MHz with 32.00 GB/s bandwidth, while the NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M uses GDDR5 at 1350 MHz with 86.40 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What are the DirectX and Vulkan support levels for these GPUs?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M255 supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.2.170. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.2.175.

Q: Which GPU has higher pixel and texture rates?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M leads in both: 8.160 GPixel/s versus 7.520 GPixel/s for AMD, and 32.64 GTexel/s versus 22.56 GTexel/s for AMD.

Q: What is the transistor count and die size for each chip?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M255 uses the Topaz chip with 1,550 million transistors on a 125 mm² die. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M uses GK107 with 1,270 million transistors on a 118 mm² die.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon R5 M255 is built on the GCN 3.0 architecture using the Topaz chip, while the NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M relies on the older Kepler architecture with the GK107 chip. Both are fabricated by TSMC on a 28 nm process, but the AMD chip packs more transistors: 1,550 million versus 1,270 million for NVIDIA. Despite the higher transistor count, AMD's die is slightly larger at 125 mm² compared to 118 mm², yielding a higher transistor density of 12.4M per mm² versus 10.8M per mm².

The shading unit counts are identical: both GPUs feature 384 shading units. However, the resource distribution differs. The AMD Radeon R5 M255 has 24 texture mapping units and 8 raster operation pipelines, whereas the NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M has 32 TMUs and 16 ROPs. This gives NVIDIA a structural advantage in texture and pixel throughput, reflected in its higher texture rate of 32.64 GTexel/s and pixel rate of 8.160 GPixel/s compared to AMD's 22.56 GTexel/s and 7.520 GPixel/s.

Clock speeds also differ. The NVIDIA part runs at a base clock of 980 MHz with a boost of 1020 MHz, while the AMD card has a base clock of 925 MHz and a boost of 940 MHz. In terms of raw floating-point compute, NVIDIA's FP32 output is 783.4 GFLOPS, slightly ahead of AMD's 721.9 GFLOPS. The AMD card also lists FP16 performance at the same 721.9 GFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, while the NVIDIA card has no listed FP16 capability.

Memory architecture is a major differentiator. Both use a 128-bit bus and 2 GB capacity, but the AMD Radeon R5 M255 pairs with DDR3 memory at 1000 MHz (2 Gbps effective) for 32.00 GB/s bandwidth. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M uses GDDR5 at 1350 MHz (5.4 Gbps effective), delivering 86.40 GB/s, which is 2.7 times the bandwidth of the AMD part. This memory bandwidth gap is significant for texture-heavy workloads and frame buffer operations.

Interface and power characteristics also separate the two. The AMD card uses a PCIe 3.0 x8 interface, while the NVIDIA card uses PCIe 3.0 x16. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M is rated at 50 W TDP, comes as an MXM Module, has no power connectors, and its display outputs are listed as portable device dependent. The AMD card has no listed TDP, slot width, or display outputs in the database.

API support is close but not identical. The AMD card supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.2.170. The NVIDIA card supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.2.175. Both support OpenGL 4.6. The NVIDIA card also has a Geekbench Metal score of 3132, a test not present for the AMD card.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct head-to-head benchmark recorded in the database is Geekbench OpenCL. In this test, the NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M scores 4934, while the AMD Radeon R5 M255 scores 4650. The delta is 5.8% in NVIDIA's favor.

The average benchmark scores tell a different story, though. The AMD Radeon R5 M255 has an average score of 4788 across its benchmark suite, which is 18.7% higher than the NVIDIA card's average of 4033. This discrepancy is explained by the benchmark sets: the AMD card's average includes its Geekbench Vulkan score of 4925, while the NVIDIA card's average is dragged down by its Metal score of 3132, a test that does not exist for the AMD part.

Looking at the nearest rivals provides context for each card's standing. The AMD Radeon R5 M255's nearest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 12 GB with an average score of 4791, a delta of only 0.1%. The AMD Radeon R5 M335 trails at 4752 (0.8% behind), the NVIDIA GeForce 940MX leads at 4844 (1.2% ahead), and the AMD Radeon R8 M445DX sits at 4727 (1.3% behind). This tight cluster around the 4700 to 4850 range shows the AMD card is well within the performance band of its immediate peers.

The NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M's nearest rivals cluster lower. The AMD FirePro M4150 scores 4013 (0.5% behind), the Intel HD Graphics 630 scores 4075 (1% ahead), the AMD Radeon HD 6850 X2 scores 3977 (1.4% behind), and the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT 8 GB scores 4093 (1.5% ahead). The NVIDIA card sits in the 4000 to 4100 range, a noticeably lower performance tier than the AMD Radeon R5 M255's neighborhood.

For the AMD card, the strongest performance evidence comes from its Vulkan score of 4925, which is competitive with its OpenCL score of 4650 and contributes to its higher average. For the NVIDIA card, the OpenCL score of 4934 demonstrates solid compute capability, but the Metal score of 3132 represents a significant weak point that pulls the average down.

The Verdict

The data presents a split decision. In the single direct comparison available, the NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M wins the OpenCL test by 5.8%. However, the AMD Radeon R5 M255 has a substantially higher average benchmark score of 4788 versus 4033, a 18.7% advantage, and sits at a higher percentile rank (28th versus 24th).

Users prioritizing raw compute in OpenCL workloads should favor the NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M, as its 4934 OpenCL score edges out the AMD card's 4650. The NVIDIA card also offers superior memory bandwidth at 86.40 GB/s versus 32.00 GB/s, which can matter in memory-bound scenarios.

Users looking at overall benchmark performance across multiple APIs should favor the AMD Radeon R5 M255. Its average score of 4788 places it among rivals like the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 12 GB (4791) and the NVIDIA GeForce 940MX (4844), while the NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M's average of 4033 places it alongside integrated graphics like the Intel HD Graphics 630 (4075).

The AMD card's Vulkan support at version 1.2.170 and DirectX 12 (12_0) gives it a more modern feature set for newer titles, while the NVIDIA card's DirectX 12 (11_0) support is more limited. The NVIDIA card does have a higher Vulkan version at 1.2.175, but the AMD card's higher DirectX feature level is notable.

For users in the market for a legacy mobile GPU, the choice depends on workload. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M is the better pick for OpenCL compute and memory bandwidth sensitivity, with a 50 W TDP clearly documented. The AMD Radeon R5 M255 is the better pick for overall average performance and modern API support, though its power characteristics are not documented in the database.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon R5 M255 | NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M |

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

| Architecture | GCN 3.0 | Kepler |

| Chip | Topaz | GK107 |

| Transistors | 1,550 million | 1,270 million |

| Die Size | 125 mm² | 118 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 12.4M / mm² | 10.8M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 925 MHz | 980 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 940 MHz | 1020 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1000 MHz (2 Gbps effective) | 1350 MHz (5.4 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Type | DDR3 | GDDR5 |

| Memory Bandwidth | 32.00 GB/s | 86.40 GB/s |

| TMUs | 24 | 32 |

| ROPs | 8 | 16 |

| Pixel Rate | 7.520 GPixel/s | 8.160 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 22.56 GTexel/s | 32.64 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 721.9 GFLOPS | 783.4 GFLOPS |

| FP16 | 721.9 GFLOPS (1:1) | null |

| TDP | null | 50 W |

| Slot Width | null | MXM Module |

| Power Connectors | null | None |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | null | Portable Device Dependent |

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

| Vulkan | 1.2.170 | 1.2.175 |

| Release Date | 2014-10-11 | 2013-06-24 |

| Predecessor | Solar System | GeForce 600M |

| Successor | Polaris Mobile | GeForce 800M |

| Generation | Gem System (R5 M200) | GeForce 700M |

| Percentile | 28 | 24 |

| Average Benchmark Score | 4788 | 4033 |

Shared specifications include the 28 nm process node, TSMC foundry, 2 GB memory size, 128-bit bus width, 384 shading units, OpenGL 4.6 support, and end-of-life production status.