AMD Radeon R5 M255 vs NVIDIA Quadro K3100M Comparison
AMD Radeon R5 M255
Quadro K3100M
PERFORMANCE BENCHMARKS
Analysis: AMD Radeon R5 M255 vs NVIDIA Quadro K3100M
# NVIDIA Quadro K3100M vs AMD Radeon R5 M255: Mobile Workstation Graphics Compared
The database places the NVIDIA Quadro K3100M and the AMD Radeon R5 M255 in adjacent tiers of the mobile GPU landscape, but the benchmark results show a clear separation in compute performance. The Quadro K3100M, based on the GK104 chip with a Kepler architecture, records an average benchmark score of 5154 across the suite. The Radeon R5 M255, built on the Topaz chip with a GCN 3.0 architecture, averages 4788. This places the Quadro K3100M in the 30th percentile of all GPUs, while the Radeon R5 M255 sits in the 28th percentile. The data indicates a consistent edge for the NVIDIA part in raw compute, but the AMD part has its own merits in specific workloads.
Head-to-Head Benchmarks
The most direct comparison comes from the head-to-head benchmark results recorded in the database. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the NVIDIA Quadro K3100M scores 6154, while the AMD Radeon R5 M255 scores 4650. This is a decisive 32.3% advantage for the NVIDIA part. This is a substantial margin, indicating that in compute-heavy OpenCL workloads, the Quadro K3100M's Kepler architecture is able to maintain a significant lead over the GCN-based Radeon R5 M255.
The Vulkan results tell a similar but slightly closer story. The NVIDIA Quadro K3100M posts a score of 5484 in the Geekbench Vulkan test, against the AMD Radeon R5 M255's 4925. The delta here is 11.4%, still firmly in favor of the NVIDIA GPU. While both GPUs show competence in this modern graphics API, the Quadro maintains its advantage. The benchmark suite shows 2 wins for the NVIDIA Quadro K3100M and 0 for the AMD Radeon R5 M255 across the recorded head-to-head tests, establishing a clear pattern of superiority in these specific workloads.
Where Each One Wins
Looking at the raw scores alone might suggest a simple hierarchy, but the architectural differences between these two GPUs tell a more nuanced story. The NVIDIA Quadro K3100M wins decisively in the OpenCL and Vulkan compute tests, as shown by the 32.3% and 11.4% margins respectively. Its 768 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs are paired with a 256-bit memory bus, allowing it to reach a pixel rate of 11.30 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 45.18 GTexel/s. These are the metrics of a workstation-oriented part designed to sustain professional applications.
The AMD Radeon R5 M255, by contrast, is built on the GCN third-generation architecture with 384 shading units and 8 ROPs. Its memory subsystem is a 128-bit bus with 32.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The Radeon's advantage lies elsewhere: the 2 GB frame buffer is double that of the Quadro, and its boost clock of 940 MHz is noticeably higher than the Quadro's 706 MHz. In memory-bound or bandwidth-sensitive scenarios, these characteristics can narrow the gap. Yet, the recorded benchmarks in the database show that in the tested APIs, the NVIDIA part consistently holds the lead. The Quadro K3100M's 3,540 million transistor count on a 294 mm² die, built on TSMC's 28nm process, gives it a transistor density of 12.0M per mm², versus the Radeon's 1,550 million transistors and 12.4M per mm² density.
FAQ
Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score, the NVIDIA Quadro K3100M or the AMD Radeon R5 M255?
A: The NVIDIA Quadro K3100M, with an average score of 5154 compared to the AMD Radeon R5 M255's 4788.
Q: In the Geekbench Vulkan test, what is the performance delta between these two GPUs?
A: The NVIDIA Quadro K3100M scores 5484, which is 11.4% higher than the AMD Radeon R5 M255's 4925.
Q: What is the GDDR5 memory bandwidth of the NVIDIA Quadro K3100M?
A: The Quadro K3100M features 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth.
Q: When were these two GPUs released?
A: The NVIDIA Quadro K3100M was released on 2013-07-22, and the AMD Radeon R5 M255 was released on 2014-10-11.
Q: Which GPU has the higher boost clock?
A: The AMD Radeon R5 M255 has a higher boost clock at 940 MHz, compared to the NVIDIA Quadro K3100M's 712 MHz.
The Verdict
The data gives a clear directive for different use cases. Pick the NVIDIA Quadro K3100M if your primary workload is raw compute. It is the winner in both recorded Geekbench tests, with a 32.3% lead in OpenCL and an 11.4% lead in Vulkan. Its architecture delivers a higher shading unit count (768 versus 384), more ROPs (32 versus 8), and a significantly wider memory bus (256-bit versus 128-bit), which directly translates into the superior pixel and texture rates recorded in the database. This is the card for professional 3D applications, CAD, and GPU-accelerated compute tasks.
Choose the AMD Radeon R5 M255 if your application is more memory-sensitive or favors lower power draw. The AMD card has double the frame buffer (2 GB versus 4 GB), a larger memory-side boost, and its GCN architecture demonstrates the higher clock speeds. The data shows it is a coherent competitor in a smaller notebook chassis, particularly where the workload can leverage its DDR memory subsystem. For pure compute and API-constrained benchmarks, the NVIDIA Quadro K3100M is the statistically superior part, and the recommended pick based on the recorded measurements.