AMD Radeon R5 M330 vs NVIDIA GeForce 930M Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce 930M and AMD Radeon R5 M330 are two end-of-life mobile graphics solutions from 2015, both built on the same 28 nm TSMC process. Despite their similar vintage and target segment, benchmark data shows they take different paths to performance: the GeForce 930M wins the OpenCL test by a significant margin, while the Radeon R5 M330 counters with a decisive Vulkan victory. The result is a split decision where the preferred GPU depends entirely on the workload, as the data shows each card holding a clear edge in one of the two measured APIs.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking difference in the head-to-head results is the GeForce 930M’s commanding performance in Geekbench OpenCL. The NVIDIA part scores 5046 points, while the AMD Radeon R5 M330 manages only 4302 points. That works out to a 17.3% advantage for the GeForce 930M, a substantial gap that places the NVIDIA chip in a different performance tier for compute-heavy OpenCL workloads. This margin is large enough to be felt in real-world applications that leverage OpenCL acceleration, where the GeForce 930M would deliver noticeably faster results.

The tables turn completely in Geekbench Vulkan, however. Here the AMD Radeon R5 M330 takes the lead with a score of 4037, versus 3729 for the GeForce 930M. The delta is 7.6% in AMD’s favor, meaning the Radeon part is the stronger choice for Vulkan-based rendering and modern graphics APIs. Interestingly, the GeForce 930M’s Vulkan score is actually lower than its OpenCL score, while the Radeon R5 M330’s Vulkan result is closer to its OpenCL figure—a pattern that suggests the AMD architecture handles this newer API more efficiently relative to its own baseline.

Looking at average benchmark scores across all tests, the GeForce 930M posts an average of 4388 points, which places it at the 26th percentile among all GPUs. The Radeon R5 M330’s average is 4170 points, putting it at the 25th percentile. The 218-point gap in average scores is modest, reflecting the split nature of the head-to-head results. The GeForce 930M’s nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce GT 645M, scores 4411 points—just 0.5% higher—while the AMD part’s closest competitor is the NVIDIA Quadro K2100M at 4151 points, a mere 0.4% difference. These narrow deltas indicate both cards are tightly clustered with their immediate peers, and the real differentiators are the API-specific wins.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce 930M leads with an average benchmark score of 4388, compared to the AMD Radeon R5 M330’s 4170. This places the NVIDIA part at the 26th percentile of all GPUs, one point above the Radeon’s 25th percentile.

Q: How do the two cards compare in OpenCL performance?

A: The GeForce 930M wins decisively in Geekbench OpenCL, scoring 5046 versus the Radeon R5 M330’s 4302. This represents a 17.3% advantage for the NVIDIA card, making it the clear choice for OpenCL-accelerated applications.

Q: Which GPU performs better in Vulkan?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M330 is the faster card in Geekbench Vulkan, achieving 4037 points against the GeForce 930M’s 3729. The 7.6% margin gives AMD the edge in this modern graphics API.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference between the two?

A: Both cards feature 2 GB of DDR3 memory on a 64-bit bus, but the AMD Radeon R5 M330 runs its memory at 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective), yielding 14.40 GB/s of bandwidth. The NVIDIA GeForce 930M operates at 800 MHz (1600 Mbps effective) for 12.80 GB/s. The AMD card has a 12.5% bandwidth advantage.

Q: How do their compute specifications differ?

A: The GeForce 930M has 384 shading units, 24 texture mapping units, and 8 ROPs, delivering 421.6 GFLOPS of FP32 performance. The Radeon R5 M330 has 320 shading units, 20 TMUs, and 8 ROPs, but achieves 659.2 GFLOPS FP32—about 56% higher—thanks to its higher clock speeds.

Q: Which card has the lower power draw?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M330 is rated at 18 W TDP, while the NVIDIA GeForce 930M has a 33 W TDP. The AMD part draws 45% less power, making it the more efficient option for thin-and-light notebooks.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA GeForce 930M is the better pick for scenarios that rely on OpenCL compute. Its 17.3% lead in Geekbench OpenCL is the single largest performance gap in the comparison, and it makes the card suitable for applications like OpenCL-accelerated video encoding, physics simulation, or productivity tools that offload work to the GPU through this API. The GeForce 930M’s higher average benchmark score of 4388 also gives it a slight overall edge in aggregate performance, which could translate to better results in mixed workloads that don’t strictly depend on one API.

The AMD Radeon R5 M330, by contrast, wins in Vulkan-based workloads. Its 4037-point Vulkan score is not only higher than the GeForce 930M’s 3729, but it also represents a smaller drop from its OpenCL performance, suggesting the GCN architecture handles this API with greater relative efficiency. For gaming or applications built on Vulkan, the Radeon R5 M330 is the stronger choice. Additionally, its significantly lower 18 W TDP makes it the preferred option for battery-conscious designs, as it delivers competitive performance while drawing 15 W less power than the NVIDIA part.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs diverge most notably in their clock speeds and compute resources. The AMD Radeon R5 M330 runs at a base clock of 955 MHz with a boost up to 1030 MHz, while the NVIDIA GeForce 930M is locked at 549 MHz for both base and boost. This 406 MHz base clock difference and 481 MHz boost difference are the primary drivers of the AMD card’s higher theoretical performance figures. The Radeon achieves 8.240 GPixel/s pixel rate and 20.60 GTexel/s texture rate, while the GeForce manages 4.392 GPixel/s and 13.18 GTexel/s respectively.

Memory speed also differs, with the Radeon R5 M330 using 900 MHz memory (1800 Mbps effective) for 14.40 GB/s bandwidth, versus the GeForce 930M’s 800 MHz (1600 Mbps effective) for 12.80 GB/s. Both cards use 2 GB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus, so the bandwidth advantage belongs entirely to AMD’s higher memory clock. The shading unit count favors NVIDIA at 384 versus AMD’s 320, and TMUs favor NVIDIA 24 to 20, but the Radeon’s much higher clocks overcome this deficit in raw throughput. Power consumption is another clear difference: the GeForce 930M draws 33 W, while the Radeon R5 M330 is rated at just 18 W.

Architecture Differences

The NVIDIA GeForce 930M is built on the Maxwell architecture, specifically the GM108S chip. It uses 1,020 million transistors on a 77 mm² die, giving it a transistor density of 13.2 million per square millimeter. Maxwell is known for its efficiency-focused design, and the GeForce 930M supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Its API support is notable for Vulkan 1.4, which is a newer version than what the AMD card offers.

The AMD Radeon R5 M330 uses the GCN 1.0 architecture with the Exo chip. It packs 690 million transistors onto a smaller 56 mm² die, resulting in a slightly lower transistor density of 12.3 million per square millimeter. GCN 1.0 is an older architecture, which is reflected in its API support: DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The Vulkan version difference is significant in practice, as the GeForce 930M’s Vulkan 1.4 support is a full two revisions ahead of the Radeon’s Vulkan 1.2.170, which may explain why the NVIDIA card performs differently across the two API tests.

The generational context also differs. The GeForce 930M belongs to the GeForce 900M generation, succeeding the GeForce 800M and preceding the GeForce 10 Mobile series. The Radeon R5 M330 is part of the Gem System (R5 M300) generation, with the Solar System as its predecessor and Polaris Mobile as its successor. Both cards are end-of-life products, but the architectural choices made by each manufacturer are evident in their benchmark profiles—NVIDIA’s Maxwell delivers a stronger OpenCL showing, while AMD’s GCN 1.0 holds its own in Vulkan despite older API version support.