AMD Radeon R5 M330 vs NVIDIA GeForce GT 645M Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce GT 645M and AMD Radeon R5 M330 are two end-of-life mobile graphics solutions from different eras, with the data showing a near-even split in benchmark wins. The GT 645M, built on the Kepler architecture, takes the Vulkan test with a 20.8% advantage, while the R5 M330, based on GCN 1.0, dominates the OpenCL workload by 37.7%. Neither GPU stands out in the broader landscape: the GT 645M sits at the 26th percentile of all GPUs with an average benchmark score of 4411, and the R5 M330 is just behind at the 25th percentile with an average of 4170. The verdict is straightforward. The GT 645M is the better choice for users running Vulkan-based applications, where its 4875 score against the R5 M330's 4037 represents a substantial lead. The R5 M330, conversely, is the pick for OpenCL compute tasks, as its 4302 score far outpaces the GT 645M's 2680. For general-purpose use, the two are statistically inseparable—the GT 645M's average score of 4411 places it only 0.5% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce 930M (4388) and 1.2% ahead of the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200 (4360), while the R5 M330's 4170 average is within 1.9% of the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT 8 GB (4093) and 0.4% ahead of the NVIDIA Quadro K2100M (4151). The data does not suggest a clear overall winner; it points to a workload-dependent choice between two aging parts.

The Verdict

The benchmark data reveals a split decision that hinges entirely on the API in question. For Vulkan workloads, the NVIDIA GeForce GT 645M is the definitive winner. Its score of 4875 is 20.8% higher than the AMD Radeon R5 M330's 4037, a margin that would translate into noticeably smoother frame rates in Vulkan-titled games or applications. This advantage is substantial enough that any user prioritizing Vulkan compatibility should select the GT 645M without hesitation. Conversely, the R5 M330 dominates OpenCL compute. Its 4302 score is a full 37.7% ahead of the GT 645M's 2680, indicating that the AMD part is far more capable for general-purpose GPU computing tasks such as video encoding, physics simulations, or data processing that leverage OpenCL.

In the broader context, neither GPU is a performance leader. The GT 645M's average benchmark score of 4411 places it in the 26th percentile of all GPUs, while the R5 M330's 4170 average lands it in the 25th percentile. The closest rivals to the GT 645M are the NVIDIA GeForce 930M (4388, just 0.5% lower), the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200 (4360, 1.2% lower), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 GDDR6 (4335, 1.8% lower). The R5 M330's nearest competitors include the NVIDIA Quadro K3000M (4241, 1.7% higher), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (4193, 0.5% higher), and the NVIDIA Quadro K2100M (4151, 0.4% lower). This data shows both parts are clustered tightly with mid-range mobile GPUs from their respective generations, with no significant separation from the pack. The choice between the two should be dictated solely by the target application's API preference, as the head-to-head results show one win for each side.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from fundamentally different architectural lineages, which explains their divergent benchmark behavior. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 645M uses the GK107 chip built on the Kepler architecture, manufactured by TSMC on a 28 nm process. This chip contains 1,270 million transistors on a die size of 118 mm², yielding a transistor density of 10.8 million per square millimeter. The AMD Radeon R5 M330, by contrast, uses the Exo chip based on GCN 1.0 architecture, also produced by TSMC on a 28 nm node. However, the AMD chip is considerably smaller and less complex, with 690 million transistors on a 56 mm² die, giving it a higher transistor density of 12.3 million per square millimeter.

The core configurations differ significantly. The GT 645M packs 384 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 raster output units. The R5 M330 has fewer of each: 320 shading units, 20 TMUs, and only 8 ROPs. Despite having fewer cores, the R5 M330 compensates with higher clocks—its base frequency is 955 MHz with a boost up to 1030 MHz, compared to the GT 645M's 709 MHz base and 780 MHz boost. This clock advantage translates into raw throughput numbers: the R5 M330 achieves 659.2 GFLOPS of FP32 performance and 8.240 GPixel/s pixel rate, while the GT 645M manages 599.0 GFLOPS and 6.240 GPixel/s. The GT 645M, however, leads in texture rate with 24.96 GTexel/s versus the R5 M330's 20.60 GTexel/s, thanks to its larger TMU count.

Memory architecture is another major divergence point. Both cards feature 2 GB of DDR3 memory, but the GT 645M uses a 128-bit bus width resulting in 28.80 GB/s of bandwidth, while the R5 M330 is limited to a 64-bit bus and just 14.40 GB/s—exactly half the bandwidth. This disparity is critical for memory-intensive workloads. The GT 645M also connects via PCIe 3.0 x16, whereas the R5 M330 uses PCIe 3.0 x8, halving the interface bandwidth. Power consumption favors the AMD part, with an 18 W TDP versus the GT 645M's 32 W, making the R5 M330 more thermally efficient for thin-and-light laptops. Both are IGP-class solutions with no power connectors and portable-device-dependent display outputs. API support is similar: both support DirectX 12 (with the GT 645M at 11_0 feature level and the R5 M330 at 11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan (1.2.175 for NVIDIA, 1.2.170 for AMD). The GT 645M launched on 2012-09-30 as part of the GeForce 600M generation, succeeding GeForce 500M and preceding GeForce 700M. The R5 M330 arrived later on 2015-05-04 in the Gem System (R5 M300) generation, succeeding Solar System and preceding Polaris Mobile.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins in Vulkan benchmarks?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GT 645M wins decisively in the Geekbench Vulkan test, scoring 4875 against the AMD Radeon R5 M330's 4037, a 20.8% advantage.

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

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M330 is far superior in OpenCL, achieving a Geekbench OpenCL score of 4302 versus the GT 645M's 2680, representing a 37.7% lead for the AMD part.

Q: Which GPU has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GT 645M offers 28.80 GB/s of bandwidth due to its 128-bit memory bus, while the AMD Radeon R5 M330 provides only 14.40 GB/s on a 64-bit bus, both using 2 GB of DDR3 memory.

Q: What are the power requirements of each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M330 has a significantly lower TDP of 18 W, compared to the NVIDIA GeForce GT 645M's 32 W, making the AMD part more power-efficient for mobile implementations.

Q: How do these GPUs rank against all others?

A: The GT 645M is in the 26th percentile of all GPUs with an average benchmark score of 4411, while the R5 M330 is in the 25th percentile with an average score of 4170, indicating both are below-average performers.

Q: Which GPU has higher clock speeds?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M330 operates at a base clock of 955 MHz with a 1030 MHz boost, substantially higher than the GT 645M's 709 MHz base and 780 MHz boost.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce GT 645M | AMD Radeon R5 M330 |

|---|---|---|

| Chip | GK107 | Exo |

| Architecture | Kepler | GCN 1.0 |

| Generation | GeForce 600M | Gem System (R5 M300) |

| Transistors | 1,270 million | 690 million |

| Die Size | 118 mm² | 56 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 10.8M / mm² | 12.3M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 709 MHz | 955 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 780 MHz | 1030 MHz |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 64 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 28.80 GB/s | 14.40 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 384 | 320 |

| TMUs | 32 | 20 |

| ROPs | 16 | 8 |

| Pixel Rate | 6.240 GPixel/s | 8.240 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 24.96 GTexel/s | 20.60 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 599.0 GFLOPS | 659.2 GFLOPS |

| TDP | 32 W | 18 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |

| DirectX Version | 12 (11_0) | 12 (11_1) |

| Vulkan Version | 1.2.175 | 1.2.170 |

| Release Date | 2012-09-30 | 2015-05-04 |

| Predecessor | GeForce 500M | Solar System |

| Successor | GeForce 700M | Polaris Mobile |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark results provide a clear and contrasting picture of these two GPUs' strengths. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the AMD Radeon R5 M330 achieves a score of 4302, while the NVIDIA GeForce GT 645M manages only 2680. This 37.7% difference is the largest margin in either direction and demonstrates a significant advantage for the AMD part in compute-oriented workloads. The R5 M330's higher FP32 throughput of 659.2 GFLOPS, combined with its superior clock speeds, likely drives this result despite its narrower 64-bit memory bus and lower 14.40 GB/s bandwidth. The GT 645M's lower 599.0 GFLOPS and slower 709 MHz base clock cannot compensate, even with its 128-bit bus and 28.80 GB/s bandwidth.

The Geekbench Vulkan test tells the opposite story. Here, the NVIDIA GeForce GT 645M scores 4875 against the R5 M330's 4037, yielding a 20.8% win for NVIDIA. This result is notable because the R5 M330 actually has higher raw compute specifications—more FP32 throughput and higher clocks—yet the GT 645M still prevails in the Vulkan API. The GT 645M's superior memory bandwidth (28.80 GB/s vs 14.40 GB/s) and larger TMU count (32 vs 20) likely contribute to its better Vulkan performance, as graphics workloads in this API tend to be memory-bandwidth-sensitive. The texture rate difference, with the GT 645M at 24.96 GTexel/s versus the R5 M330's 20.60 GTexel/s, further supports this interpretation.

The final tally shows one win for each GPU, with the GT 645M taking the Vulkan test and the R5 M330 taking the OpenCL test. The average benchmark scores reinforce the split: the GT 645M averages 4411 across its three tests (Geekbench Metal, OpenCL, and Vulkan), while the R5 M330 averages 4170 across its two tests (OpenCL and Vulkan). The GT 645M's inclusion of a Metal benchmark (5679) boosts its average, while the R5 M330 lacks a Metal result altogether. When comparing only the shared tests, the R5 M330's OpenCL dominance (4302 vs 2680) is offset by the GT 645M's Vulkan advantage (4875 vs 4037), leaving the overall performance roughly balanced. The percentile rankings confirm this parity, with the GT 645M at the 26th percentile and the R5 M330 at the 25th percentile, separated by just one percentage point in the global distribution of GPU performance.