AMD Radeon R5 M320 vs AMD Radeon RX 560 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only shared benchmark between these two GPUs is Geekbench OpenCL, and the result is decisively one-sided. The AMD Radeon RX 560 scores 16,472, while the AMD Radeon R5 M320 manages just 5,051. This represents a 69.3% deficit for the older part, meaning the RX 560 delivers more than three times the raw compute throughput in this workload. The delta is so large that it dwarfs any architectural nuance; the R5 M320 is simply outclassed in absolute terms.

When placed against their respective nearest rivals, both cards occupy similar percentile territory, but for different reasons. The R5 M320 sits at the 27th percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 4,657. Its closest competitor is the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT 16 GB, which matches it exactly at 4,657 with a 0% delta. The NVIDIA Quadro P400 is 0.6% ahead at 4,684, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M trails by 0.6% at 4,628. The R5 M320's score is thus tightly clustered, with the entire rival band spanning less than 1.4% from top to bottom.

The RX 560, despite its commanding OpenCL win, lands at the 26th percentile with an average score of 4,569. Its nearest rival is the AMD Radeon R5 M230 at 4,577, which is 0.2% ahead. The Intel HD Graphics P530 is 0.2% behind at 4,560, and the NVIDIA Quadro M3000M sits 1.1% ahead at 4,621. This creates a curious situation: the RX 560 wins the head-to-head OpenCL test by a massive margin, yet its aggregate benchmark average is actually lower than the R5 M320's. The reason is that the RX 560's average pulls in additional tests — Passmark DirectX 9, 10, 11, 12, G2D, G3D, and GPU Compute — plus Geekbench Metal. These scores, which include a Passmark G3D result of 3,671 and a GPU Compute score of 1,437, drag its average down relative to the single-test dataset of the R5 M320.

In the head-to-head tally, the RX 560 wins 1 out of 1 shared tests, while the R5 M320 wins none. This is a clean sweep, but the single test limits the statistical weight. The data shows a clear performance hierarchy, yet the percentile rankings suggest both parts are near the bottom of the global distribution, separated by just one percentile point.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different GCN generations, and that gap explains most of the performance disparity. The R5 M320 uses GCN 1.0 architecture on the Jet chip, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. The RX 560 uses GCN 4.0 on the Polaris 21 chip, built on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The node shrink is substantial: 28 nm to 14 nm allows for a transistor density increase from 12.3 million per square millimeter to 24.4 million per square millimeter.

Transistor counts reflect the generational leap. The R5 M320 packs 690 million transistors on a 56 mm² die, while the RX 560 contains 3,000 million transistors on a 123 mm² die. That is over four times the transistor count on roughly double the die area. The density improvement is not linear — the RX 560 achieves 24.4M / mm² versus 12.3M / mm² for the older part — indicating both architectural and process improvements.

Shading resources differ by a factor of 3.2. The R5 M320 has 320 shading units, 20 texture mapping units, and 8 render output units. The RX 560 has 1,024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. This quadrupling of TMUs and doubling of ROPs directly impacts texture fill and pixel throughput. The pixel rate jumps from 6.840 GPixel/s to 20.40 GPixel/s, and the texture rate from 17.10 GTexel/s to 81.60 GTexel/s.

Clock speeds also favor the newer part. The R5 M320 runs at a base of 780 MHz and a boost of 855 MHz, while the RX 560 operates at 1,175 MHz base and 1,275 MHz boost. That is roughly a 50% higher clock frequency, compounding with the increased shading units. Floating-point performance tells the story: the R5 M320 delivers 547.2 GFLOPS FP32, while the RX 560 reaches 2.611 TFLOPS — nearly five times higher. The RX 560 also supports FP16 at a 1:1 ratio (2.611 TFLOPS), a feature absent from the R5 M320's specifications.

Memory architecture is another fundamental split. The R5 M320 uses 4 GB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus, yielding 16.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The RX 560 uses 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, achieving 112.0 GB/s — a sevenfold increase. Memory clocks differ as well: 1,000 MHz (2 Gbps effective) for the R5 M320 versus 1,750 MHz (7 Gbps effective) for the RX 560. The bus width doubling and speed increase combine for the massive bandwidth advantage.

API support differs at the DirectX level. The R5 M320 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), while the RX 560 supports DirectX 12 (12_0). Both offer OpenGL 4.6, but Vulkan versions differ: 1.2.170 for the R5 M320 versus 1.3 for the RX 560. The generation names reflect the lineage: the R5 M320 belongs to the Gem System (R5 M300) family, while the RX 560 belongs to Polaris (RX 500). Their predecessors and successors also differ, with the R5 M320 succeeding Solar System and preceding Polaris Mobile, while the RX 560 succeeds Arctic Islands and precedes Vega.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 560 wins in every measurable compute scenario. Its OpenCL score of 16,472 against 5,051 for the R5 M320 indicates a clear advantage in general-purpose GPU workloads, including physics simulations, video encoding, and data-parallel tasks. The FP32 throughput of 2.611 TFLOPS versus 547.2 GFLOPS means the RX 560 can handle compute-heavy applications that would choke the older part. The FP16 support at 1:1 ratio further extends its reach into machine learning inference and media processing, where the R5 M320 has no equivalent capability.

For gaming, the RX 560 is the only viable option between the two. The pixel rate of 20.40 GPixel/s versus 6.840 GPixel/s, combined with the texture rate of 81.60 GTexel/s versus 17.10 GTexel/s, allows the RX 560 to drive modern game engines at reasonable settings. The 112.0 GB/s memory bandwidth prevents texture streaming bottlenecks that the 16.00 GB/s of the R5 M320 would invariably hit. The R5 M320, with its 64-bit DDR3 bus, is limited to low-resolution, low-detail scenarios typical of legacy titles or basic 2D workloads.

The R5 M320 does have one niche: power-constrained environments. It is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with no power connector requirements and no TDP listed, making it suitable for thin-and-light laptops where thermals and battery life trump performance. The RX 560, by contrast, is a dual-slot card with a 75 W TDP and a suggested PSU of 250 W. It requires a PCIe slot and dedicated cooling, disqualifying it from mobile form factors.

In terms of display outputs, the RX 560 offers 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0b, and 1x DisplayPort 1.4a, enabling multi-monitor setups and modern display features. The R5 M320's outputs are listed as "Portable Device Dependent," meaning they vary by laptop implementation and offer no consistent multi-display capability. For content creation, the RX 560's Passmark G2D score of 485 and G3D score of 3,671 indicate it can handle 2D acceleration and moderate 3D rendering, while the R5 M320's single OpenCL score suggests limited utility beyond basic acceleration.

The percentile standings are nearly identical — 27th for the R5 M320 and 26th for the RX 560 — but this is misleading. The R5 M320's percentile is based on only two benchmarks, while the RX 560's is based on nine, including several DirectX and Passmark tests that expose its mid-range positioning. The RX 560's DirectX 12 score of 21 out of a possible scale, and DirectX 11 score of 25, indicate it is not a high-end part, but it is functional across a broader range of APIs than the R5 M320.

Specification Differences

The following specifications differ between the AMD Radeon R5 M320 and the AMD Radeon RX 560:

• Chip: Jet (R5 M320) vs. Polaris 21 (RX 560)
• Architecture: GCN 1.0 (R5 M320) vs. GCN 4.0 (RX 560)
• Generation: Gem System (R5 M300) vs. Polaris (RX 500)
• Process Node: 28 nm (R5 M320) vs. 14 nm (RX 560)
• Foundry: TSMC (R5 M320) vs. GlobalFoundries (RX 560)
• Transistors: 690 million vs. 3,000 million
• Die Size: 56 mm² vs. 123 mm²
• Transistor Density: 12.3M / mm² vs. 24.4M / mm²
• Base Clock: 780 MHz vs. 1,175 MHz
• Boost Clock: 855 MHz vs. 1,275 MHz
• Memory Clock: 1,000 MHz (2 Gbps effective) vs. 1,750 MHz (7 Gbps effective)
• Memory Type: DDR3 vs. GDDR5
• Memory Bus Width: 64 bit vs. 128 bit
• Memory Bandwidth: 16.00 GB/s vs. 112.0 GB/s
• Shading Units: 320 vs. 1,024
• TMUs: 20 vs. 64
• ROPs: 8 vs. 16
• Pixel Rate: 6.840 GPixel/s vs. 20.40 GPixel/s
• Texture Rate: 17.10 GTexel/s vs. 81.60 GTexel/s
• FP32: 547.2 GFLOPS vs. 2.611 TFLOPS
• FP16: Not listed vs. 2.611 TFLOPS (1:1)
• TDP: Not listed vs. 75 W
• Slot Width: IGP vs. Dual-slot
• Power Connectors: Not listed vs. None
• Suggested PSU: Not listed vs. 250 W
• Display Outputs: Portable Device Dependent vs. 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0b, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a
• DirectX Support: 12 (11_1) vs. 12 (12_0)
• Vulkan Support: 1.2.170 vs. 1.3
• Dimensions: Not listed vs. 170 mm (6.7 inches) length
• Release Date: 2015-05-04 vs. 2017-04-17
• Predecessor: Solar System vs. Arctic Islands
• Successor: Polaris Mobile vs. Vega
• Launch MSRP: Not listed vs. 99 USD

The RX 560 also lists a Geekbench Metal score of 18,941, which the R5 M320 does not have. The R5 M320 lists a Geekbench Vulkan score of 4,262, which the RX 560 does not have in its benchmark array.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher OpenCL score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 560 scores 16,472 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the AMD Radeon R5 M320 scores 5,051. The RX 560 leads by 69.3%.

Q: What is the transistor count difference?

A: The R5 M320 has 690 million transistors on a 56 mm² die, while the RX 560 has 3,000 million transistors on a 123 mm² die. The RX 560 has over four times the transistor count.

Q: How does memory bandwidth compare?

A: The R5 M320 offers 16.00 GB/s via 4 GB DDR3 on a 64-bit bus. The RX 560 offers 112.0 GB/s via 4 GB GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, a sevenfold increase.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same DirectX version?

A: No. The R5 M320 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), while the RX 560 supports DirectX 12 (12_0). Both support OpenGL 4.6, but Vulkan versions differ (1.2.170 vs. 1.3).

Q: What is the form factor difference?

A: The R5 M320 is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with no listed TDP or power connectors. The RX 560 is a dual-slot card with a 75 W TDP, no power connectors, and a suggested PSU of 250 W.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The RX 560 has 1,024 shading units, compared to 320 for the R5 M320. The RX 560 also has 64 TMUs and 16 ROPs, versus 20 TMUs and 8 ROPs for the R5 M320.