AMD Radeon R5 M330 vs Intel HD Graphics P530 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a clear, if unexpected, picture: Intel's integrated HD Graphics P530 defeats AMD's dedicated Radeon R5 M330 in both recorded tests. In Geekbench OpenCL, the Intel part scores 4549 against AMD's 4302, a 5.7% advantage. The gap widens considerably in Geekbench Vulkan, where Intel reaches 4571 while AMD manages only 4037 — a 13.2% lead for the Intel solution. This is notable because the R5 M330 is a discrete-class GPU with its own dedicated memory, while the P530 is an IGP sharing system memory. The data suggests that in these specific workloads, the architectural efficiency of Intel's Skylake GT2 silicon outweighs the R5 M330's hardware resource advantage.

Looking at the broader context, both parts sit in the lower quartile of all GPUs. The P530 holds a 26th percentile ranking, while the R5 M330 sits at the 25th percentile. Their average benchmark scores reinforce this proximity: the P530 averages 4560, while the R5 M330 averages 4170. That 390-point gap in average score is driven almost entirely by the Vulkan result, where Intel's 4571 crushes AMD's 4037. The OpenCL scores are closer, but Intel still wins that round decisively.

The nearest rival data adds another layer. The P530's closest competitors include the AMD Radeon RX 560 (avg 4569, delta -0.2%), the AMD Radeon R5 M230 (avg 4577, delta -0.4%), and the NVIDIA Quadro M3000M (avg 4621, delta -1.3%). Interestingly, the R5 M330's closest rival list includes the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (avg 4193, delta -0.5%) and the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT 8 GB (avg 4093, delta 1.9%). This means the P530, despite being an integrated part, benchmarks closer to a discrete RX 560 than the R5 M330 benchmarks to a GTX 1050 Ti. The performance hierarchy is inverted from what form factor alone would suggest.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins in OpenCL performance?

A: The Intel HD Graphics P530 wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 4549, beating the AMD Radeon R5 M330's 4302 by 5.7%.

Q: How large is the Vulkan performance gap?

A: The P530 scores 4571 in Geekbench Vulkan, while the R5 M330 scores 4037. This gives Intel a 13.2% advantage — more than double the OpenCL lead.

Q: What percentile ranking does each GPU hold?

A: The Intel HD Graphics P530 ranks in the 26th percentile of all GPUs, while the AMD Radeon R5 M330 sits just below at the 25th percentile.

Q: Is the Intel part's average benchmark score higher?

A: Yes. The P530 averages 4560 across its two benchmark tests, while the R5 M330 averages 4170. The difference is 390 points.

Q: Does the R5 M330 win any head-to-head benchmark?

A: No. The head-to-head data shows the Intel part winning both recorded tests — Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan. The win count stands at 2 for Intel and 0 for AMD.

Q: How does the R5 M330 compare to its closest rival, the Quadro K2100M?

A: The R5 M330's average score of 4170 is just 0.4% above the NVIDIA Quadro K2100M's 4151, making them statistically near-identical performers.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from fundamentally different design philosophies. Intel's HD Graphics P530 uses the Skylake GT2 chip built on Generation 9.0 architecture, fabricated on a 14 nm+ process at Intel's own foundry. The die size is 123 mm². AMD's Radeon R5 M330 uses the Exo chip with GCN 1.0 architecture, built on TSMC's 28 nm process, with a die size of just 56 mm². AMD's chip packs 690 million transistors, yielding a transistor density of 12.3M per mm². Intel's transistor count is not listed, but the larger die on a more advanced node suggests a different density profile.

The compute resources tell a story of contrasting priorities. The R5 M330 has 320 shading units, 20 texture mapping units, and 8 ROPs. The P530 has only 192 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 3 ROPs. On paper, AMD looks stronger — more cores, more texture units, more than double the ROP count. Yet the benchmark results reverse this expectation. The P530's Generation 9.0 architecture appears to extract more useful work per shader, particularly in Vulkan, where its 13.2% lead over AMD suggests better driver optimization or more efficient command processing.

Clock behavior also differs. The R5 M330 runs at a base clock of 955 MHz with a boost to 1030 MHz. The P530 starts at a modest 350 MHz but boosts to 1000 MHz. The Intel part's low base clock is typical for integrated graphics that scale down aggressively when idle, but its boost behavior indicates it can reach near-parity with AMD's sustained clocks under load. Memory configuration diverges sharply: the P530 uses system-shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth, while the R5 M330 has 2 GB of dedicated DDR3 on a 64-bit bus delivering 14.40 GB/s. The shared-memory approach of the Intel part can be a bottleneck in theory, but the benchmark data suggests it does not hamper these specific workloads.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every measurable specification. The P530 is built on a 14 nm+ process, while the R5 M330 uses 28 nm — a full node generation apart. Intel's die measures 123 mm², more than double AMD's 56 mm². The R5 M330 has a listed transistor count of 690 million; Intel's is not provided. Clock speeds favor AMD: 955 MHz base and 1030 MHz boost versus Intel's 350 MHz base and 1000 MHz boost. Memory differs fundamentally: the R5 M330 has 2 GB of dedicated DDR3 with a 64-bit bus and 14.40 GB/s bandwidth, while the P530 relies entirely on system-shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth.

Compute units diverge significantly. The R5 M330 fields 320 shading units, 20 TMUs, and 8 ROPs, outperforming the P530's 192 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 3 ROPs. Pixel rate reflects this: the R5 M330 hits 8.240 GPixel/s versus the P530's 3.000 GPixel/s. Texture rate follows suit at 20.60 GTexel/s versus 16.00 GTexel/s. Floating-point performance also favors AMD: 659.2 GFLOPS FP32 versus Intel's 384.0 GFLOPS. Intel does list FP16 at 768.0 GFLOPS (2:1), while AMD's FP16 is not recorded.

Power and interface details also separate them. The R5 M330 has a TDP of 18 W with no power connectors, while the P530 draws 15 W. Both are IGP slot-width parts. The R5 M330 uses a PCIe 3.0 x8 bus interface, while the P530 uses Intel's Ring Bus. Display outputs are motherboard-dependent for Intel and portable-device-dependent for AMD. API support shows minor differences: both support DirectX 12, but Intel lists 12_1 while AMD lists 11_1; both support OpenGL 4.6; Vulkan support differs slightly, with Intel at 1.3 and AMD at 1.2.170.

The Verdict

The data points to a single conclusion: the Intel HD Graphics P530 is the superior performer in the tested workloads. It wins both head-to-head benchmarks, holds a higher average score (4560 vs 4170), and ranks one percentile higher overall. The margin in Vulkan is particularly emphatic — 13.2% is not a marginal difference but a substantial lead. This matters because Vulkan is increasingly relevant for modern games and compute applications. The P530's nearest rival list includes the AMD Radeon RX 560, a discrete GPU, with a delta of just -0.2%. That means the integrated Intel part benchmarks essentially at parity with a dedicated AMD GPU from a higher tier. Meanwhile, the R5 M330's closest rival, the NVIDIA Quadro K2100M, is within 0.4% — but that rival is itself a modest performer.

For users choosing between these two, the P530 is the data-backed pick. It delivers more performance in both OpenCL and Vulkan, despite having fewer shading units, fewer ROPs, and shared memory. The R5 M330 does offer dedicated 2 GB memory, which could help in memory-sensitive scenarios, but the benchmark results do not show that advantage manifesting in the recorded tests. The R5 M330's higher pixel rate (8.240 GPixel/s) and texture rate (20.60 GTexel/s) also present theoretical advantages, but these do not translate into benchmark wins. The verdict is unambiguous: Intel wins on measured performance.

Where Each One Wins

Intel HD Graphics P530 wins in every measured category. It takes Geekbench OpenCL with 4549 against 4302, a 5.7% lead. It takes Geekbench Vulkan with 4571 against 4037, a 13.2% lead. Its average score of 4560 exceeds the R5 M330's 4170 by 390 points. Its percentile ranking of 26th beats AMD's 25th. For any workload covered by these benchmarks — OpenCL compute, Vulkan rendering, or general GPU acceleration — the P530 is the stronger choice. Its 14 nm+ process node and Generation 9.0 architecture appear to deliver better real-world efficiency than AMD's older GCN 1.0 design on 28 nm.

AMD Radeon R5 M330 does not win a single recorded benchmark. However, the specification sheet suggests scenarios where it could theoretically excel. Its 320 shading units and 8 ROPs provide more raw compute capacity than Intel's 192 shading units and 3 ROPs. Its pixel rate of 8.240 GPixel/s is more than double Intel's 3.000 GPixel/s, and its texture rate of 20.60 GTexel/s exceeds Intel's 16.00 GTexel/s. Its dedicated 2 GB DDR3 memory with 14.40 GB/s bandwidth could be advantageous in applications that require consistent memory access without competing with the CPU for system RAM. If a workload is heavily fill-rate bound or requires dedicated VRAM, the R5 M330's hardware profile suggests it might perform better — but the data does not confirm this. In the recorded tests, the P530 wins outright. The R5 M330's best case is as a fallback for systems where Intel's IGP is unavailable or where driver support for AMD's OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.2.170 is preferred.