AMD Radeon R5 M335 vs Intel HD Graphics 630 Comparison

The Verdict

The benchmark database presents a clear split between these two end-of-life integrated and discrete graphics solutions. The AMD Radeon R5 M335 wins both recorded head-to-head tests, with a 32.3% advantage in Geekbench OpenCL and a 34.4% advantage in Geekbench Vulkan. Its average benchmark score of 4752 places it in the 28th percentile of all GPUs, while the Intel HD Graphics 630 averages 4075 and sits in the 24th percentile.

The data suggests the AMD part is the stronger choice for compute-oriented tasks that use OpenCL or Vulkan. The Intel part, however, counters with a Geekbench Metal score of 5099, a test the AMD side does not have recorded. This Metal result is notably higher than the Intel OpenCL score of 3587 and Vulkan score of 3540, which indicates Intel's driver or hardware handles Apple's Metal API more efficiently than its own OpenCL path.

For a user choosing between these two, the decision depends on the workload. If the application relies on OpenCL or Vulkan, the AMD Radeon R5 M335 is the better pick based on the recorded data. If the system runs in a Metal-centric environment, the Intel HD Graphics 630 shows a stronger single-test result. The Intel part also carries a 15 W TDP, making it suited for power-constrained designs, whereas the AMD card has no TDP listed in the database.

The AMD Radeon R5 M335 sits near the AMD Radeon R8 M445DX (0.5% higher average score) and the AMD Radeon R5 M255 (0.7% lower). The Intel HD Graphics 630 sits close to the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT 8 GB (0.4% lower) and the NVIDIA Quadro K2100M (1.8% lower). Neither part is a performance leader in the database's full GPU ranking, but the AMD part edges ahead in the two shared benchmarks.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon R5 M335 uses the GCN 1.0 architecture on a 28 nm process from TSMC, built around the Exo chip. The Intel HD Graphics 630 uses the Generation 9.5 architecture on a 14 nm++ process from Intel, built around the Kaby Lake GT2 chip. These are fundamentally different design philosophies: AMD's discrete mobile GPU versus Intel's integrated graphics block.

The AMD part packs 690 million transistors on a 56 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 12.3M per mm². The Intel part has no transistor count or die size recorded in the database, so a direct density comparison is not possible from the available data.

Shading unit counts differ significantly. The AMD Radeon R5 M335 has 320 shading units, while the Intel HD Graphics 630 has 192. The texture mapping units go the other way: AMD has 20 TMUs, Intel has 24. Raster output units also differ, with AMD at 8 ROPs and Intel at only 3 ROPs. These counts explain some of the performance deltas in the benchmarks.

The Intel part supports a broader feature set in the API column. It lists DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The AMD part lists DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The Intel iGPU also records a dedicated fp16 rate of 768.0 GFLOPS (2:1), while the AMD part has no fp16 entry.

Memory architecture differs completely. The AMD Radeon R5 M335 has 2 GB of dedicated DDR3 memory on a 64-bit bus, yielding 14.40 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel HD Graphics 630 uses system shared memory with a system-dependent bandwidth. This means the AMD part does not compete with the CPU for memory bandwidth, while the Intel part does.

The bus interface also separates them: AMD uses PCIe 3.0 x8, Intel uses a Ring Bus. The AMD card has no power connectors listed and is described as portable device dependent for display outputs. The Intel part is an IGP with motherboard-dependent display outputs.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records two shared benchmark tests between these GPUs. In Geekbench OpenCL, the AMD Radeon R5 M335 scores 4745 against the Intel HD Graphics 630's 3587. This gives AMD a 32.3% lead. In Geekbench Vulkan, AMD scores 4758 versus Intel's 3540, a 34.4% advantage. Both wins are substantial and consistent.

The AMD part's average benchmark score of 4752 aligns closely with its individual OpenCL and Vulkan results, indicating stable performance across those APIs. The Intel part's average of 4075 is pulled down by its OpenCL and Vulkan scores, but its Metal score of 5099 sits well above that average. This suggests the Intel iGPU performs differently depending on the API, with Metal being a clear strength.

Looking at the nearest rivals for context, the AMD Radeon R5 M335's average of 4752 is 0.5% above the AMD Radeon R8 M445DX (4727) and 1.5% above the NVIDIA Quadro P400 (4684). It is 0.7% below the AMD Radeon R5 M255 (4788) and 0.8% below the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 12 GB (4791). That last comparison is curious: a low-end mobile GPU from 2015 nearly matches a high-end desktop GPU from 2022 in the database's average score, which likely reflects the benchmark's sensitivity to driver optimizations rather than raw hardware capability.

The Intel HD Graphics 630's average of 4075 is 1% above the NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M (4033) and 1.5% above the AMD FirePro M4150 (4013). It sits 0.4% below the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT 8 GB (4093) and 1.8% below the NVIDIA Quadro K2100M (4151). The AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT 8 GB being only 0.4% ahead of a Kaby Lake iGPU in average score is another data point that suggests these benchmark averages may not reflect real-world gaming or compute workloads accurately.

The AMD Radeon R5 M335 wins two head-to-head tests, and the Intel HD Graphics 630 wins zero. However, the Intel part has an additional Metal test in its benchmark list, and that score (5099) would beat the AMD part's OpenCL score (4745) by 7.5% if compared directly. The database does not include a Metal test for the AMD part, so this comparison is indirect but worth noting.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every recorded specification field. The AMD Radeon R5 M335 uses GCN 1.0 architecture, while Intel HD Graphics 630 uses Generation 9.5. The process nodes are 28 nm (TSMC) versus 14 nm++ (Intel). The AMD chip is Exo, the Intel chip is Kaby Lake GT2.

Shading units: AMD has 320, Intel has 192. TMUs: AMD has 20, Intel has 24. ROPs: AMD has 8, Intel has 3. Pixel rate: AMD is 8.240 GPixel/s, Intel is 3.000 GPixel/s. Texture rate: AMD is 20.60 GTexel/s, Intel is 24.00 GTexel/s. FP32: AMD is 659.2 GFLOPS, Intel is 384.0 GFLOPS. FP16: AMD has no entry, Intel has 768.0 GFLOPS (2:1).

Memory size: AMD has 2 GB dedicated DDR3, Intel has system shared. Memory bus: AMD is 64-bit, Intel is system shared. Memory bandwidth: AMD is 14.40 GB/s, Intel is system dependent. Memory clock: AMD is 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective), Intel is system shared.

Base clock: AMD has none listed, Intel is 350 MHz. Boost clock: AMD has none listed, Intel is 1000 MHz. TDP: AMD has none listed, Intel is 15 W. Power connectors: AMD lists "None", Intel has no entry. Bus interface: AMD is PCIe 3.0 x8, Intel is Ring Bus.

DirectX support: AMD is 12 (11_1), Intel is 12 (12_1). Vulkan: AMD is 1.2.170, Intel is 1.3. OpenGL is the same at 4.6. Display outputs: AMD is portable device dependent, Intel is motherboard dependent. Release dates: AMD is 2015-10-20, Intel is 2016-08-29. Production status for both is end-of-life.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score in the database?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M335 has an average benchmark score of 4752, while the Intel HD Graphics 630 has an average of 4075. AMD leads by 16.6% in this metric.

Q: Does the Intel HD Graphics 630 win any recorded benchmark test?

A: In the head-to-head tests, the Intel part wins zero tests. However, it has a Geekbench Metal score of 5099, which is a test not recorded for the AMD part. That Metal score is higher than both of the AMD part's individual scores.

Q: How much faster is the AMD Radeon R5 M335 in OpenCL?

A: The AMD part scores 4745 in Geekbench OpenCL versus 3587 for the Intel HD Graphics 630, a 32.3% advantage.

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

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M335 uses 2 GB of dedicated DDR3 memory on a 64-bit bus with 14.40 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel HD Graphics 630 uses system shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth, meaning it shares the CPU's memory pool.

Q: Does the Intel part have a higher texture rate despite fewer shading units?

A: Yes. The Intel HD Graphics 630 has 24 TMUs and a texture rate of 24.00 GTexel/s, while the AMD Radeon R5 M335 has 20 TMUs and a texture rate of 20.60 GTexel/s. Intel leads here by 16.5%, despite having 128 fewer shading units.

Q: Which GPU supports the newer Vulkan version?

A: The Intel HD Graphics 630 supports Vulkan 1.3, while the AMD Radeon R5 M335 supports Vulkan 1.2.170. Both support OpenGL 4.6, and the Intel part supports DirectX 12 (12_1) versus AMD's DirectX 12 (11_1).

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon R5 M335 wins in raw compute throughput. Its FP32 rate of 659.2 GFLOPS is 71.7% higher than the Intel HD Graphics 630's 384.0 GFLOPS. Its pixel rate of 8.240 GPixel/s is nearly triple the Intel part's 3.000 GPixel/s. In the two shared benchmarks, OpenCL and Vulkan, AMD wins decisively. For any workload that relies on these APIs, the AMD part is the stronger choice.

The AMD part also wins in dedicated memory. With 2 GB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus, it does not have to contend with the CPU for memory bandwidth. The Intel part's system shared memory means its performance can vary depending on the system's RAM configuration and CPU load. This makes the AMD part more predictable in memory-sensitive tasks.

The Intel HD Graphics 630 wins in power efficiency. Its 15 W TDP is explicitly recorded, while the AMD part has no TDP listed. For thin-and-light laptops or fanless designs, the Intel iGPU's power envelope is a clear advantage. The Intel part also wins in the Metal benchmark, scoring 5099, which suggests it is the better choice for macOS or other Metal-based environments.

The Intel part wins on API compatibility. It supports Vulkan 1.3 and DirectX 12 (12_1), while the AMD part is limited to Vulkan 1.2.170 and DirectX 12 (11_1). For applications that require the latest API features, the Intel iGPU is more future-proof despite its lower raw performance.

The Intel part also wins in texture throughput. Its 24.00 GTexel/s exceeds the AMD part's 20.60 GTexel/s, which could benefit certain texture-heavy workloads despite the AMD part's higher pixel rate. The Intel part's fp16 rate of 768.0 GFLOPS (2:1) also gives it an edge in half-precision compute, a domain where the AMD part has no recorded capability.

In practical terms, the AMD Radeon R5 M335 is the pick for discrete GPU tasks like OpenCL compute, Vulkan gaming, or any workload that benefits from dedicated VRAM. The Intel HD Graphics 630 is the pick for power-sensitive systems, Metal-based platforms, and applications that need the latest DirectX or Vulkan features. The database shows a clear trade-off: AMD offers more raw compute and memory isolation, Intel offers lower power draw, broader API support, and a stronger Metal showing.