AMD Radeon R5 M320 vs NVIDIA GeForce 930A Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains a single direct comparison between the NVIDIA GeForce 930A and the AMD Radeon R5 M320: the Geekbench OpenCL test. In this measurement, the NVIDIA GeForce 930A scores 5317 points, while the AMD Radeon R5 M320 scores 5051 points. This gives the NVIDIA part a 5.3% advantage, a clear but not overwhelming lead in raw compute throughput.

The NVIDIA GeForce 930A sits at the 31st percentile among all GPUs in the database, while the AMD Radeon R5 M320 sits at the 27th percentile. This percentile gap confirms that the NVIDIA part occupies a slightly higher tier of overall performance, even though both are entry-level mobile solutions.

Looking at the nearest rivals for each card helps contextualize these scores. The GeForce 930A's closest competitor is the NVIDIA GeForce 840M, which averages 5322 points, a negligible 0.1% difference. The 930A also trades blows with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M (5308 points, 0.2% behind) and the NVIDIA GeForce 940M (5284 points, 0.6% ahead). The AMD Radeon R7 M445 scores 5358 points, putting it 0.8% ahead of the 930A. These numbers show that the GeForce 930A is tightly clustered with a group of GPUs that all land within roughly 1% of each other, making the 5.3% gap to the R5 M320 more meaningful than it might first appear.

The AMD Radeon R5 M320's nearest rivals tell a different story. Its average benchmark score across all tests is 4657 points, which is lower than its individual OpenCL score of 5051 because the database also includes its Vulkan result of 4262 points. The R5 M320's nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT 16 GB at 4657 points (0% delta), the NVIDIA Quadro P400 at 4684 points (0.6% ahead), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M at 4628 points (0.6% behind), and the NVIDIA Quadro M3000M at 4621 points (0.8% behind). This grouping shows the R5 M320 is positioned in a different performance neighborhood entirely, roughly 12% below the GeForce 930A's average score of 5317 points.

The head-to-head data records one win for the NVIDIA GeForce 930A and zero wins for the AMD Radeon R5 M320. The 5.3% delta in OpenCL is consistent across the full benchmark suite when accounting for the R5 M320's additional Vulkan test, which drags its average down further.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA GeForce 930A wins the only directly comparable benchmark, the Geekbench OpenCL test, with a 5.3% margin. This suggests the 930A has a meaningful edge in general-purpose compute workloads that leverage OpenCL, such as video encoding, image processing, and certain scientific applications. Its higher shading unit count (384 versus 320) and higher clock speeds contribute to this advantage.

The AMD Radeon R5 M320 has no benchmark wins in the recorded data. However, it does possess a Vulkan score of 4262 points, a test that the GeForce 930A was not measured on. This means the R5 M320 can at least run Vulkan workloads, and its API support includes DirectX 12 (11_1) compared to the 930A's DirectX 12 (11_0), giving it a slightly newer feature level for that API. For users prioritizing Vulkan compatibility, the R5 M320 has a measurable result in the database, whereas the 930A has none.

For gaming workloads, the data is less comprehensive. The OpenCL score is often a proxy for general compute performance, but actual frame rates depend on driver optimization and game engine specifics. The 930A's higher texture rate (22.58 GTexel/s versus 17.10 GTexel/s) and pixel rate (7.528 GPixel/s versus 6.840 GPixel/s) indicate it should handle rasterization tasks more efficiently, even if no direct gaming benchmark is recorded.

The AMD part's larger memory allocation of 4 GB versus the NVIDIA's 2 GB could be an advantage in memory-intensive scenarios, though both use DDR3 with a 64-bit bus, and their bandwidth numbers are nearly identical (16.02 GB/s for NVIDIA, 16.00 GB/s for AMD). The extra capacity does not translate to a bandwidth advantage, so its practical benefit is limited to holding larger textures or datasets that fit within the 4 GB frame buffer.

Architecture Differences

The NVIDIA GeForce 930A is built on the Maxwell architecture using the GM108 chip, manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It contains 1,020 million transistors on a die size of 77 mm², yielding a transistor density of 13.2 million per square millimeter. The Maxwell architecture is known for its efficient instruction scheduling and power management, which is reflected in the 930A's 33 W TDP.

The AMD Radeon R5 M320 uses the GCN 1.0 architecture with the Jet chip, also on a 28 nm TSMC process. It packs 690 million transistors into a 56 mm² die, giving a density of 12.3 million per square millimeter. GCN 1.0 was AMD's first-generation Graphics Core Next design, which introduced a unified shader architecture and different compute scheduling compared to Maxwell.

The compute resource difference is stark. The 930A has 384 shading units, 24 texture mapping units, and 8 raster operation units. The R5 M320 has 320 shading units, 20 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. The NVIDIA part has 20% more shading units and TMUs, while matching the ROP count. This explains the 5.3% OpenCL lead, though the clock speed difference also matters: the 930A runs at 928 MHz base and 941 MHz boost, while the R5 M320 runs at 780 MHz base and 855 MHz boost. The NVIDIA card's higher clocks compound its shader advantage.

Both cards support a 64-bit memory bus with DDR3 memory. The 930A uses 2 GB at 1001 MHz (2 Gbps effective), providing 16.02 GB/s of bandwidth. The R5 M320 uses 4 GB at 1000 MHz (2 Gbps effective), providing 16.00 GB/s. The bandwidth difference is practically zero, so memory throughput is not a differentiator.

The floating-point performance reflects the architectural gap. The 930A delivers 722.7 GFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the R5 M320 delivers 547.2 GFLOPS. That is a 32% higher raw compute ceiling for the NVIDIA part, which aligns with its higher shader count and clock speeds. Neither card has dedicated ray tracing or tensor cores, as both predate those technologies.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in several key specification fields. The most visible difference is memory capacity: the GeForce 930A has 2 GB DDR3, while the Radeon R5 M320 has 4 GB DDR3. Both use a 64-bit bus, so the capacity difference does not affect bandwidth.

Clock speeds differ notably. The 930A operates at 928 MHz base and 941 MHz boost. The R5 M320 operates at 780 MHz base and 855 MHz boost. The NVIDIA part's boost clock is 86 MHz higher than the AMD part's boost clock, and its base clock is 148 MHz higher.

Shader resources differ: 384 shading units versus 320, 24 TMUs versus 20, and a matching 8 ROPs. The pixel rate is 7.528 GPixel/s for the 930A versus 6.840 GPixel/s for the R5 M320. The texture rate is 22.58 GTexel/s versus 17.10 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 722.7 GFLOPS versus 547.2 GFLOPS.

The transistor count and die size also differ: 1,020 million transistors on 77 mm² for NVIDIA, versus 690 million on 56 mm² for AMD. The TDP is listed as 33 W for the 930A, while the R5 M320 has no TDP listed in the database.

API support differs slightly. The 930A supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The R5 M320 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The AMD part has a higher DirectX feature level, while the NVIDIA part has a newer Vulkan version.

The bus interface is identical for both: PCIe 3.0 x8. Both are listed as IGP (integrated graphics processor) slot width with portable device dependent display outputs. The release dates are close: March 12, 2015 for the 930A, and May 4, 2015 for the R5 M320. Both are end-of-life products. The 930A's predecessor is the GeForce 800A, while the R5 M320's predecessor is listed as "Solar System" and its successor is "Polaris Mobile."

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher OpenCL benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce 930A scores 5317 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the AMD Radeon R5 M320 scores 5051, giving the NVIDIA part a 5.3% advantage.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon R5 M320 have any benchmark where it wins?

A: No. The head-to-head data records zero wins for the R5 M320. However, it has a unique Geekbench Vulkan score of 4262, which was not measured for the GeForce 930A.

Q: How much memory does each GPU have?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce 930A has 2 GB of DDR3 memory, while the AMD Radeon R5 M320 has 4 GB of DDR3 memory. Both use a 64-bit bus with nearly identical bandwidth (16.02 GB/s vs 16.00 GB/s).

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce 930A has 384 shading units, compared to 320 for the AMD Radeon R5 M320. The 930A also has 24 TMUs versus 20, while both have 8 ROPs.

Q: What are the clock speed differences?

A: The GeForce 930A runs at 928 MHz base and 941 MHz boost. The Radeon R5 M320 runs at 780 MHz base and 855 MHz boost. The NVIDIA part has higher clocks at both base and boost levels.

Q: Do these GPUs support the same DirectX version?

A: No. The AMD Radeon R5 M320 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), while the NVIDIA GeForce 930A supports DirectX 12 (11_0). The AMD part has a slightly higher feature level.

The Verdict

The data points clearly to the NVIDIA GeForce 930A as the stronger performer of the two. It wins the only direct benchmark comparison with a 5.3% margin, holds a higher percentile ranking (31st versus 27th), and delivers substantially higher compute metrics across the board: 722.7 GFLOPS versus 547.2 GFLOPS in FP32, 22.58 GTexel/s versus 17.10 GTexel/s in texture rate, and 7.528 GPixel/s versus 6.840 GPixel/s in pixel rate.

The AMD Radeon R5 M320's sole advantages are its larger 4 GB memory capacity and its slightly higher DirectX feature level (11_1 versus 11_0). It also has a recorded Vulkan score, though the GeForce 930A was not tested for Vulkan, so no direct comparison exists. For users who need more than 2 GB of video memory for large textures or data sets, the R5 M320 offers that capacity, but the memory bandwidth is virtually identical to the 930A, so the extra memory does not translate to faster throughput.

For general compute tasks, OpenCL workloads, and any application that leverages shader count and clock speed, the NVIDIA GeForce 930A is the superior choice based on the recorded data. Its 5.3% lead in OpenCL and its tighter clustering with higher-performing rivals (like the GeForce 840M and GTX 980M) suggest it will deliver more consistent performance. The R5 M320's nearest rivals include the Quadro P400 and GTX 970M, which are all within 0.8% of its average score, but that average is dragged down by its Vulkan result.

The Verdict is straightforward: the NVIDIA GeForce 930A is the better GPU for compute performance. The AMD Radeon R5 M320 should only be considered if the 4 GB memory capacity is an absolute requirement, or if the slightly higher DirectX feature level matters for a specific application. Otherwise, the 930A wins on every measurable performance metric recorded in the database.