AMD Radeon R5 M330 vs NVIDIA GeForce GT 745M Comparison

AMD Radeon R5 M330 and NVIDIA GeForce GT 745M are both end-of-life mobile GPUs from the 28 nm era, but they cater to different priorities. The AMD part leads in OpenCL compute and raw shader throughput, while the NVIDIA part dominates in Vulkan performance and memory bandwidth. Neither card is a modern gaming solution, but the data shows a clear split: pick the R5 M330 for compute-style workloads and the GT 745M for API-forward tasks or memory-heavy scenarios. The GT 745M also offers a wider memory bus and higher pixel fill rate, making it the more balanced choice for legacy titles, though its lower FP32 output limits its peak compute potential.

The Verdict

The AMD Radeon R5 M330 wins on raw computational horsepower. Its FP32 rating of 659.2 GFLOPS is 56.4% higher than the GT 745M's 421.6 GFLOPS, and its texture rate of 20.60 GTexel/s exceeds the NVIDIA part's 17.57 GTexel/s by 17.2%. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the R5 M330 scores 4302 versus 3580, a 20.2% advantage. This makes it the better pick for GPGPU tasks, OpenCL-accelerated applications, or any workload that scales with shader count and raw math throughput. Its 320 shading units and 20 TMUs outperform the GT 745M's 384 shaders and 32 TMUs in practice because of the NVIDIA part's lower clocks — the R5 M330 runs at 955 MHz base and 1030 MHz boost, while the GT 745M has no listed base or boost clocks, and its FP32 and texture rates confirm it operates at a lower effective frequency.

The NVIDIA GeForce GT 745M counters with a massive win in Vulkan. Its Geekbench Vulkan score of 5502 crushes the R5 M330's 4037, a 26.6% lead. This suggests better driver optimization for modern APIs and a more efficient execution path for draw calls. The GT 745M also has a 128-bit memory bus versus the R5 M330's 64-bit bus, delivering 64.00 GB/s bandwidth against 14.40 GB/s — a 4.4x advantage. Its pixel rate of 4.392 GPixel/s is lower than the R5 M330's 8.240 GPixel/s, but its 16 ROPs (double the AMD's 8) help with fill-rate-bound scenes at lower resolutions. For users who prioritize Vulkan-based games or emulators, the GT 745M is the clear winner.

The average benchmark scores reflect this split: the R5 M330 averages 4170 across its tests, while the GT 745M averages 3953, a 5.5% gap. However, the GT 745M sits at the 23rd percentile of all GPUs, just below the R5 M330's 25th percentile. In the nearest rival comparisons, the R5 M330 is 0.4% ahead of the Quadro K2100M and 1.9% ahead of the Radeon RX 9060 XT 8 GB, while the GT 745M is 0.1% behind the Radeon R5 M420 and 0.1% ahead of the GeForce 830M. Both cards are firmly in entry-level territory, so the choice depends entirely on your workload mix.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute performance?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M330. Its FP32 output is 659.2 GFLOPS versus 421.6 GFLOPS for the NVIDIA GeForce GT 745M, a 56.4% difference. The R5 M330 also wins the OpenCL benchmark 4302 to 3580.

Q: Which GPU is faster in Vulkan?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GT 745M. It scores 5502 in the Geekbench Vulkan test, beating the R5 M330's 4037 by 26.6%. This is the largest single-benchmark delta between the two.

Q: How do their memory systems compare?

A: The GT 745M uses 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 64.00 GB/s bandwidth. The R5 M330 uses 2 GB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus with 14.40 GB/s bandwidth. The NVIDIA part has 4.4x more bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU is more power-efficient?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M330 has a TDP of 18 W, while the GT 745M is rated at 45 W. The AMD part delivers higher FP32 performance per watt, though the NVIDIA part counters with better Vulkan efficiency.

Q: What are their production statuses?

A: Both are end-of-life. The R5 M330 was released on May 4, 2015, and the GT 745M on March 31, 2013. Neither has a successor that shares its exact positioning — the R5 M330's successor is Polaris Mobile, and the GT 745M's is GeForce 800M.

Q: Which GPU has better pixel fill rate?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M330. Its pixel rate is 8.240 GPixel/s versus 4.392 GPixel/s for the GT 745M, a 87.6% advantage despite the NVIDIA part having double the ROPs (16 vs 8).

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon R5 M330 uses the GCN 1.0 architecture on the "Exo" chip, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It packs 690 million transistors into a 56 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 12.3M per mm². The NVIDIA GeForce GT 745M uses the Kepler architecture on the GK107 chip, also on a 28 nm TSMC process, but with 1,270 million transistors on a 118 mm² die — a density of 10.8M per mm². The NVIDIA die is 2.1x larger and holds 84% more transistors, but the AMD chip achieves higher density.

Both support DirectX 12, but with different feature levels: the R5 M330 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), while the GT 745M supports DirectX 12 (11_0). OpenGL support is identical at 4.6, and Vulkan support is close — 1.2.170 for AMD and 1.2.175 for NVIDIA. The bus interfaces differ: the R5 M330 uses PCIe 3.0 x8, while the GT 745M uses PCIe 3.0 x16. Neither card has ray tracing or tensor cores.

The R5 M330's GCN 1.0 design favors parallel compute, which explains its higher shader throughput. The GT 745M's Kepler architecture is more focused on geometry and memory efficiency. The AMD part's smaller die and lower transistor count make it cheaper to produce, but the NVIDIA part's larger die allows for more memory controllers (128-bit vs 64-bit) and more ROPs (16 vs 8). Both are IGP-class parts with portable-device-dependent display outputs and no power connectors.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon R5 M330 | NVIDIA GeForce GT 745M |

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

| Chip | Exo | GK107 |

| Transistors | 690 million | 1,270 million |

| Die Size | 56 mm² | 118 mm² |

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

| Base Clock | 955 MHz | Not specified |

| Boost Clock | 1030 MHz | Not specified |

| Memory Clock | 900 MHz / 1800 Mbps effective | 1000 MHz / 4 Gbps effective |

| Memory Type | DDR3 | GDDR5 |

| Memory Bus | 64 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 14.40 GB/s | 64.00 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 320 | 384 |

| TMUs | 20 | 32 |

| ROPs | 8 | 16 |

| Pixel Rate | 8.240 GPixel/s | 4.392 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 20.60 GTexel/s | 17.57 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 659.2 GFLOPS | 421.6 GFLOPS |

| TDP | 18 W | 45 W |

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

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

| Vulkan | 1.2.170 | 1.2.175 |

The GT 745M has more shading units (384 vs 320), more TMUs (32 vs 20), and more ROPs (16 vs 8), but the R5 M330's higher clocks compensate. The AMD part's 955 MHz base and 1030 MHz boost clocks versus no listed clocks for NVIDIA mean the AMD part runs significantly faster per core. The memory divide is stark: GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus gives NVIDIA 4.4x the bandwidth, but the DDR3 on a 64-bit bus keeps AMD's power draw low at 18 W versus 45 W.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two available direct benchmarks tell opposite stories. In Geekbench OpenCL, the AMD Radeon R5 M330 scores 4302 against the GT 745M's 3580, a 20.2% margin in AMD's favor. This aligns with the FP32 gap — the R5 M330's 659.2 GFLOPS versus 421.6 GFLOPS means it can process more floating-point operations per second. The GT 745M's lower FP32 output, despite having more shaders, indicates a clock disadvantage that outweighs its core count advantage.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the tables turn dramatically. The GT 745M scores 5502, while the R5 M330 manages just 4037 — a 26.6% deficit for AMD. This is a larger percentage swing than the OpenCL result, suggesting the NVIDIA driver stack handles Vulkan's explicit multi-threading and command buffer management more efficiently. The GT 745M's 128-bit memory bus and 64.00 GB/s bandwidth likely help feed the GPU faster during draw calls, even though its raw pixel and texture rates are lower.

Each GPU wins exactly one benchmark, making the head-to-head a 1-1 tie. However, the Vulkan win is more impactful for modern software, as Vulkan is the foundation for many current games and emulators. The OpenCL win matters for compute tasks like physics simulation, video encoding, or machine learning inference, where raw FP32 throughput dominates. The average benchmark scores reflect this: the R5 M330 averages 4170 across its two tests, while the GT 745M averages 3953 across three tests, including a weak Metal score of 2777 that drags its average down.

Where Each One Wins

AMD Radeon R5 M330 wins in: OpenCL compute workloads. Its 20.2% benchmark lead and 56.4% FP32 advantage make it the clear choice for GPGPU tasks that leverage shader math. The higher pixel rate (8.240 GPixel/s vs 4.392 GPixel/s) and texture rate (20.60 GTexel/s vs 17.57 GTexel/s) also help in fill-rate-bound scenarios, despite the narrower memory bus. Its 18 W TDP makes it more suitable for thin-and-light laptops where power draw is a constraint. This GPU sits at the 25th percentile of all GPUs, with a nearest rival margin of 0.4% over the Quadro K2100M and 1.9% over the Radeon RX 9060 XT 8 GB.

NVIDIA GeForce GT 745M wins in: Vulkan-based applications and memory-bandwidth-heavy tasks. Its 26.6% Vulkan benchmark lead is the strongest single result in this comparison. The 64.00 GB/s bandwidth versus 14.40 GB/s is a 4.4x advantage that benefits texture streaming, large framebuffers, and high-resolution assets. The GT 745M's 16 ROPs provide better pixel throughput in multi-sample anti-aliasing and alpha-blending scenarios, even though its pixel rate is lower on paper. Its PCIe 3.0 x16 interface doubles the bandwidth of the R5 M330's x8 link, which helps with data transfer from the CPU. The GT 745M sits at the 23rd percentile of all GPUs, just 0.1% behind the Radeon R5 M420 and 0.1% ahead of the GeForce 830M.

For legacy DirectX 11-era games, the GT 745M's wider memory bus and higher ROP count make it the safer bet, provided the software doesn't rely heavily on raw FP32. For compute-oriented applications or older OpenCL-based software, the R5 M330's higher clock speeds and shader throughput give it a decisive edge. Neither card is future-proof, but the data shows the GT 745M handles modern API workloads better, while the R5 M330 excels at raw number crunching.