AMD Radeon R5 M335 vs AMD Radeon RX 560 Comparison

The AMD Radeon R5 M335 and AMD Radeon RX 560 represent two distinct eras of mobile and desktop graphics, separated by a generational leap in architecture and manufacturing. The data shows a stark contrast in compute potential, with the RX 560 delivering a dominant performance advantage in the single available head-to-head benchmark. While the R5 M335 was designed for basic portable graphics, the RX 560 is a more capable discrete solution, and the benchmark results underscore the massive gap between them.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The sole direct comparison available in the data is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and it paints a decisive picture. In this compute-focused benchmark, the AMD Radeon RX 560 scores 16,472 points, while the AMD Radeon R5 M335 manages only 4,745 points. This translates to a delta of -71.2% for the R5 M335, meaning the RX 560 is roughly 3.5 times faster in this specific workload. The margin is not incremental; it is a categorical difference in processing power.

This single result is enough to define the relationship between the two cards. The RX 560’s score of 16,472 is not just higher; it is in a completely different performance tier. For context, the R5 M335’s average benchmark score across all tests is 4,752, which places it in the 28th percentile of all GPUs. The RX 560, despite its much higher OpenCL score, has an average benchmark score of 4,569, landing in the 26th percentile. This apparent contradiction is explained by the inclusion of other tests in the RX 560’s average, which are discussed in the FAQ section.

The head-to-head data shows the RX 560 with 1 win and the R5 M335 with 0 wins. The victory is absolute in the compute arena. The R5 M335’s nearest rivals in the overall database, such as the AMD Radeon R8 M445DX and the NVIDIA Quadro P400, have average scores of 4,727 and 4,684 respectively, highlighting that the R5 M335 is positioned among entry-level parts. In contrast, the RX 560’s nearest rivals, including the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M and the AMD Radeon R5 M230, show that its average score is dragged down by tests where it does not excel. The single OpenCL result, however, shows the true compute potential of the RX 560, which is far beyond its average suggests.

FAQ

Q: Why does the AMD Radeon RX 560 have a lower average benchmark score than the AMD Radeon R5 M335 despite winning the head-to-head test?

A: The RX 560’s average score of 4,569 is pulled down by its performance in multiple Passmark tests, including a Passmark G2D score of 485 and a Passmark DirectX 9 score of 57. The R5 M335 only has Geekbench scores (4,745 and 4,758) which are consistently around its average of 4,752. The RX 560’s high OpenCL score of 16,472 is offset by these lower scores in other specific workloads.

Q: What is the performance difference in the Geekbench OpenCL test?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 560 scores 16,472, which is 71.2% higher than the AMD Radeon R5 M335’s score of 4,745. The data shows the RX 560 as the clear winner in this compute benchmark.

Q: How do the two cards compare in terms of their overall standing among all GPUs?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M335 is in the 28th percentile of all GPUs, while the AMD Radeon RX 560 is in the 26th percentile. Despite the RX 560 having a much higher peak compute score, its average performance across a wider range of tests places it in a similar overall percentile.

Q: Are there other benchmark tests where the R5 M335 is competitive?

A: No. The head-to-head data only includes the Geekbench OpenCL test, which the R5 M335 loses. The R5 M335 has no wins in any direct comparison, while the RX 560 has 1 win.

Q: What does the Passmark DirectX 11 score of 25 for the RX 560 indicate?

A: This score is one of several Passmark results for the RX 560. It is a low score compared to its Geekbench OpenCL result, contributing to the RX 560’s lower average and overall percentile. It suggests that the RX 560’s performance is highly dependent on the specific API or workload being tested.

Q: Is the R5 M335’s Geekbench Vulkan score of 4,758 comparable to the RX 560’s performance?

A: No. The R5 M335’s Vulkan score is similar to its OpenCL score (4,745), but the RX 560’s OpenCL score is 16,472. There is no Vulkan score for the RX 560 in the data, but the existing OpenCL data shows a massive gap in compute capability.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are built on fundamentally different architectures and manufacturing processes. The AMD Radeon R5 M335 uses the GCN 1.0 architecture on a 28 nm process at TSMC, while the AMD Radeon RX 560 uses the newer GCN 4.0 architecture on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. This node shrink is a key factor in the performance gap, allowing the RX 560 to pack significantly more transistors.

The R5 M335’s chip, codenamed "Exo," contains 690 million transistors on a 56 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 12.3M / mm². In contrast, the RX 560’s "Polaris 21" chip houses 3,000 million transistors on a 123 mm² die, achieving a much higher density of 24.4M / mm². This represents a more than fourfold increase in transistor count, which directly enables the RX 560’s superior compute resources.

The architectures themselves differ in their feature sets. The R5 M335’s GCN 1.0 supports DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170, while the RX 560’s GCN 4.0 supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3. The RX 560 also has support for FP16 compute at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, whereas the R5 M335 has no listed FP16 capability. This architectural advancement allows the RX 560 to handle a broader range of modern workloads more efficiently.

The memory subsystems are also a product of their respective generations. The R5 M335 uses 2 GB of DDR3 memory on a 64-bit bus, while the RX 560 uses 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus. This difference in memory type and bus width fundamentally changes the data throughput capabilities of each card, with the RX 560 having a significant advantage in memory bandwidth.

Specification Differences

The specification sheet reveals a clear hierarchy. The most obvious difference is in the core configuration: the AMD Radeon R5 M335 has 320 shading units, 20 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 8 render output units (ROPs). The AMD Radeon RX 560, by contrast, is equipped with 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. This is a 3.2x increase in shaders and a 3.2x increase in TMUs, which directly translates to higher pixel and texture fill rates.

The clock speeds also differ substantially, though the R5 M335 lacks a listed base or boost clock. The RX 560 has a base clock of 1175 MHz and a boost clock of 1275 MHz. The R5 M335’s memory runs at 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective), while the RX 560’s memory runs at 1750 MHz (7 Gbps effective). This, combined with the wider 128-bit bus, gives the RX 560 a memory bandwidth of 112.0 GB/s compared to the R5 M335’s 14.40 GB/s.

The resulting fill rates and compute throughput are starkly different. The R5 M335 offers a pixel rate of 8.240 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 20.60 GTexel/s, with FP32 performance of 659.2 GFLOPS. The RX 560 delivers a pixel rate of 20.40 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 81.60 GTexel/s, with FP32 performance of 2.611 TFLOPS. The RX 560 is roughly 4x faster in FP32 compute and nearly 4x faster in texture fill rate.

Other differences include the RX 560’s 75 W TDP and dual-slot form factor, while the R5 M335 has no listed TDP and is described as "Portable Device Dependent." The RX 560 has a length of 170 mm (6.7 inches) and features display outputs including 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0b, and 1x DisplayPort 1.4a. The R5 M335’s display outputs are also listed as "Portable Device Dependent." The RX 560 has a suggested PSU of 250 W, while the R5 M335 has none listed.

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous. For any workload that leverages compute performance, particularly OpenCL, the AMD Radeon RX 560 is the superior choice by a massive margin. Its score of 16,472 versus the R5 M335’s 4,745 in the Geekbench OpenCL test is a 71.2% difference. This is not a close contest; the RX 560 is in a different performance class.

The R5 M335, with its 28 nm GCN 1.0 architecture and limited memory bus, is a legacy part clearly designed for basic tasks. Its 28th percentile standing among all GPUs confirms its entry-level positioning. The RX 560, despite its lower average score percentile of 26, has a peak compute capability that is far superior. The data suggests that the RX 560’s average is skewed by its performance in specific legacy DirectX tests, but its raw compute power is undeniable.

Users who need a GPU for compute-intensive applications should choose the RX 560 without hesitation. The R5 M335’s only advantage is its portability, as it is designed for mobile devices, but this comes at the cost of nearly all performance. For anyone building a desktop system or requiring significant graphics processing, the RX 560 is the only viable option based on the data. The R5 M335 is a part for a bygone era of computing.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon RX 560 wins in the only direct benchmark comparison available, the Geekbench OpenCL test. This indicates a clear victory in general-purpose compute tasks. Its architectural advantages, including a 14 nm process, 1024 shading units, and 112.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth, position it as a far more capable processor for modern applications.

The AMD Radeon R5 M335 has no direct benchmark wins in the data. Its strengths are limited to its mobile-oriented design, as indicated by its "Portable Device Dependent" display outputs and lack of a dedicated power connector. It is a chip designed for low-power integration into laptops, not for high-performance tasks. Its higher average benchmark score compared to the RX 560 is an artifact of the RX 560’s inconsistent performance across different tests, not a sign of overall superiority.

The RX 560 also wins in the field of API support, with a newer DirectX 12 (12_0) implementation and Vulkan 1.3 support, compared to the R5 M335’s DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170. The RX 560’s FP16 support at a 1:1 ratio with FP32 is another feature the R5 M335 lacks entirely. In every measurable performance metric, the RX 560 is the clear winner. The R5 M335’s only "win" is its existence as a compact, low-power mobile solution, which is not a performance advantage.