AMD Radeon R5 M420 vs AMD Radeon R7 M260 Comparison

The Verdict

The AMD Radeon R7 M260 and AMD Radeon R5 M420 are both end-of-life mobile graphics solutions from AMD, built on the same 28 nm TSMC process but representing different generations of the GCN architecture. The benchmark data shows a clear overall winner: the Radeon R5 M420 edges out the R7 M260 in the only directly comparable test, the Geekbench OpenCL benchmark, with a score of 3956 versus 3708, a 6.3% advantage for the R5 M420.

The R7 M260 occupies the 26th percentile among all GPUs in the database, while the R5 M420 sits at the 23rd percentile. This places both firmly in the entry-level mobile segment. The R7 M260 has a higher average benchmark score of 4499 when considering its two recorded tests (OpenCL and Vulkan), while the R5 M420 has an average of 3956 from its single OpenCL result. However, the head-to-head comparison only includes the OpenCL test, where the R5 M420 wins.

Buyers who prioritize a single strong OpenCL workload should choose the R5 M420. The data shows it delivers 6.3% higher performance in that specific test. The R7 M260, however, offers a Vulkan score of 5289, which is significantly higher than either card's OpenCL result, suggesting it has better support for modern graphics APIs in the database. The R7 M260 also has a higher raw specification ceiling, with more shading units, higher clock speeds, and a newer architecture revision, which may make it the more future-proof option despite losing the OpenCL head-to-head.

For users who already own a FirePro W4190M, Intel HD Graphics P530, AMD Radeon RX 560, or AMD Radeon R5 M230, the R7 M260 is essentially a lateral move. The nearest rival data shows the R7 M260 trails the AMD FirePro W4190M by 0.1%, the Intel HD Graphics P530 by 1.3%, the AMD Radeon RX 560 by 1.5%, and the AMD Radeon R5 M230 by 1.7%. These are negligible differences that would not be perceptible in real-world usage. Similarly, the R5 M420 is statistically tied with the NVIDIA GeForce 830M, NVIDIA GeForce GT 745M, NVIDIA Quadro K2000, and AMD Radeon HD 6850 X2, with deltas of 0%, 0.1%, -0.2%, and -0.5% respectively.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations despite sharing the same 28 nm manufacturing process at TSMC. The R7 M260 uses the Topaz chip based on GCN 3.0, while the R5 M420 uses the Jet chip based on the older GCN 1.0. This architectural gap is significant: GCN 3.0 introduced several efficiency improvements and a newer instruction set, while GCN 1.0 is the original implementation of the Graphics Core Next design.

The transistor counts differ substantially. The R7 M260 packs 1,550 million transistors on a 125 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 12.4 million per square millimeter. The R5 M420 has 690 million transistors on a 56 mm² die, with a density of 12.3 million per square millimeter. The R7 M260's die is more than twice the size of the R5 M420's, and it holds more than twice the transistors, which explains its higher shading unit count.

The R7 M260 features 384 shading units, 24 texture mapping units, and 8 ROPs. The R5 M420 has 320 shading units, 20 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. This gives the R7 M260 a 20% advantage in shading units and TMUs, while the ROP count is identical. The R7 M260 also runs at higher clocks: 940 MHz base and 980 MHz boost, compared to the R5 M420's 780 MHz base and 850 MHz boost. The resulting fill rates are 7.840 GPixel/s and 23.52 GTexel/s for the R7 M260, versus 6.800 GPixel/s and 17.00 GTexel/s for the R5 M420.

Memory configurations also differ. The R7 M260 has 2 GB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus, with a memory clock of 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective) and 14.40 GB/s of bandwidth. The R5 M420 has 4 GB of DDR3 on the same 64-bit bus, but runs its memory at 1000 MHz (2 Gbps effective), delivering 16.00 GB/s. The R5 M420's memory advantage is 11% in bandwidth, and it has double the capacity.

Compute throughput follows the hardware specifications. The R7 M260 delivers 752.6 GFLOPS of FP32 performance, with FP16 rated at the same 752.6 GFLOPS (1:1 ratio). The R5 M420 delivers 544.0 GFLOPS of FP32 and has no recorded FP16 rating. The R7 M260's FP32 output is 38% higher than the R5 M420's.

API support differs by generation. The R7 M260 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The R5 M420 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The DirectX feature level difference (12_0 versus 11_1) reflects the newer architecture in the R7 M260. Both use a PCIe 3.0 x8 bus interface. The R5 M420 is classified as an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with portable device dependent display outputs, while the R7 M260 does not have a slot width classification in the database.

Where Each One Wins

The R5 M420 wins the only recorded head-to-head test, the Geekbench OpenCL benchmark, with a score of 3956 against the R7 M260's 3708. This 6.3% margin suggests that the R5 M420 has better real-world OpenCL compute performance despite its lower raw specifications. This could be due to driver maturity, memory bandwidth, or the specific workload characteristics of the OpenCL test favoring the R5 M420's configuration.

The R7 M260 wins in several other respects. Its Vulkan score of 5289 is substantially higher than its own OpenCL score of 3708, indicating that modern API workloads run much better on the GCN 3.0 architecture. The R5 M420 has no recorded Vulkan score, so the R7 M260 is the only option here for users who need Vulkan support in the database. The R7 M260 also has a higher average benchmark score of 4499 across its two tests, compared to 3956 for the R5 M420, though this comparison is complicated by the different number of tests each card has.

In terms of hardware capabilities, the R7 M260 wins on shading units (384 versus 320), TMUs (24 versus 20), clock speeds (940/980 MHz versus 780/850 MHz), pixel rate (7.840 versus 6.800 GPixel/s), texture rate (23.52 versus 17.00 GTexel/s), and FP32 compute (752.6 versus 544.0 GFLOPS). The R5 M420 wins on memory capacity (4 GB versus 2 GB) and memory bandwidth (16.00 versus 14.40 GB/s).

For users who care about DirectX feature levels, the R7 M260's DirectX 12 (12_0) support is more capable than the R5 M420's DirectX 12 (11_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.2.170, so those APIs are not distinguishing factors.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 M260 has an average benchmark score of 4499 across its two recorded tests (Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan). The AMD Radeon R5 M420 has an average of 3956 from its single Geekbench OpenCL test.

Q: Which GPU is better for Vulkan workloads?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 M260 is the only one of the two with a recorded Vulkan score. It scored 5289 in Geekbench Vulkan, which is much higher than its OpenCL score of 3708. The R5 M420 has no Vulkan benchmark result in the database.

Q: How does the R7 M260 compare to its closest rivals?

A: The R7 M260 is within 1.7% of all four nearest rivals. It trails the AMD FirePro W4190M by 0.1%, the Intel HD Graphics P530 by 1.3%, the AMD Radeon RX 560 by 1.5%, and the AMD Radeon R5 M230 by 1.7%. These differences are within measurement noise.

Q: How does the R5 M420 compare to its closest rivals?

A: The R5 M420 is essentially tied with all four nearest rivals. It matches the NVIDIA GeForce 830M exactly (0% delta), leads the NVIDIA GeForce GT 745M by 0.1%, trails the NVIDIA Quadro K2000 by 0.2%, and trails the AMD Radeon HD 6850 X2 by 0.5%.

Q: Which GPU has more memory and bandwidth?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M420 has 4 GB of DDR3 memory with 16.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The AMD Radeon R7 M260 has 2 GB of DDR3 with 14.40 GB/s. The R5 M420 has double the capacity and 11% more bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has higher compute throughput?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 M260 delivers 752.6 GFLOPS of FP32 performance, which is 38% higher than the R5 M420's 544.0 GFLOPS. The R7 M260 also has FP16 capability at 752.6 GFLOPS, while the R5 M420 has no recorded FP16 rating.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains one direct head-to-head benchmark between these two GPUs: the Geekbench OpenCL test. The AMD Radeon R5 M420 scored 3956, while the AMD Radeon R7 M260 scored 3708. The R5 M420 wins by 6.3%, a notable margin for two GPUs that are otherwise closely matched in their competitive positioning.

This result is interesting because the R7 M260 has a substantial hardware advantage on paper. The R7 M260 has 384 shading units versus 320, a 20% advantage. It runs at 940 MHz base and 980 MHz boost versus 780 MHz base and 850 MHz boost, roughly a 15% clock advantage at boost. Its FP32 throughput of 752.6 GFLOPS is 38% higher than the R5 M420's 544.0 GFLOPS. Yet in the OpenCL benchmark, the R5 M420 comes out ahead by 6.3%.

The R5 M420's advantages are in memory: it has 4 GB versus 2 GB, and 16.00 GB/s versus 14.40 GB/s of bandwidth. The 11% memory bandwidth advantage may be contributing to its OpenCL win, particularly if the benchmark is memory-bound. The R5 M420's older GCN 1.0 architecture may also have more mature OpenCL driver optimization in this specific test.

The Geekbench Vulkan result for the R7 M260, 5289, is 42.6% higher than its OpenCL score. This suggests that the R7 M260 is significantly better suited to modern graphics API workloads. The R5 M420 has no Vulkan score recorded, so a direct comparison in Vulkan cannot be made from the database.

When looking at the full picture, the R7 M260's average benchmark score of 4499 is 13.7% higher than the R5 M420's 3956 average. The R7 M260's Vulkan result is a large part of this gap. If the R5 M420 had a Vulkan score, the comparison would be more complete, but the database only provides what it provides.

The percentile rankings reflect these results. The R7 M260 sits at the 26th percentile of all GPUs, while the R5 M420 sits at the 23rd percentile. Both are in the lower quarter of the database, consistent with their entry-level positioning in the mobile market.

The nearest rival data reinforces that both GPUs are clustered with a tight group of similarly performing parts. The R7 M260's closest rival is the AMD FirePro W4190M at 4505 average score, just 0.1% ahead. The R5 M420's closest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce 830M at 3957, a 0% delta. These rival clusters show that neither GPU has a meaningful performance edge over its direct competitors; the differences are all within 2%.

For the head-to-head, the single win goes to the R5 M420 in OpenCL. The R7 M260 does not win any recorded head-to-head test, as the database only includes one such test. However, the R7 M260's Vulkan score and higher average benchmark score suggest it has strengths that the head-to-head table does not capture.

The practical takeaway is that users running OpenCL-based workloads should pick the R5 M420, while users who want Vulkan support or a higher average score across multiple benchmarks should pick the R7 M260. The R7 M260's newer GCN 3.0 architecture and superior raw compute specifications make it the more capable GPU on paper, but the R5 M420's memory configuration and driver maturity give it the edge in the one test where both were measured.