AMD Radeon R5 M420 vs Intel HD Graphics 630 Comparison

Intel HD Graphics 630 and AMD Radeon R5 M420 are both end-of-life integrated graphics solutions aimed at the entry-level laptop segment. The data shows two very different design philosophies: Intel’s 14 nm++ Generation 9.5 architecture with shared system memory, versus AMD’s 28 nm GCN 1.0 architecture with dedicated 4 GB of DDR3. Despite their disparate specifications, benchmark results place them within 1 percentile of each other in the global GPU rankings, making their performance separation a matter of specific workload rather than overall capability.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only directly comparable benchmark in the data is Geekbench OpenCL, where the AMD Radeon R5 M420 posts a score of 3956 against the Intel HD Graphics 630’s 3587. That is a 9.3% advantage for AMD, a meaningful margin in this performance class. The AMD part’s higher raw compute throughput — 544.0 GFLOPS FP32 versus 384.0 GFLOPS — and its dedicated memory subsystem contribute to this lead in general-purpose compute workloads.

However, the Intel part shows its strength in other API-specific tests. The HD Graphics 630 scores 5099 in Geekbench Metal, a test the Radeon R5 M420 has no recorded result for. Similarly, Intel scores 3540 in Geekbench Vulkan, while AMD’s Vulkan support is limited to version 1.2.170 with no benchmark score recorded. This means that in Metal-based applications — primarily macOS environments — Intel holds a decisive edge, while in Vulkan titles, Intel’s 3540 score slightly trails its own OpenCL result but still demonstrates functional API support.

Looking at the average benchmark scores, the Intel part averages 4075 across three tests, while AMD averages 3956 from a single test. The Intel average is inflated by the strong Metal result, but even excluding that, its OpenCL and Vulkan scores (3587 and 3540) are within striking distance of AMD’s single OpenCL score. The percentile rankings reinforce the near-parity: Intel sits at the 24th percentile of all GPUs, AMD at the 23rd. This is a statistical tie, with both parts occupying the same performance tier.

Context from nearest rivals clarifies the picture. Intel’s 4075 average is 0.4% behind the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT 8 GB (4093) and 1% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M (4033). AMD’s 3956 average is exactly level with the NVIDIA GeForce 830M (3957) and 0.1% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GT 745M (3953). The deltaPct values show both parts are bracketed by the same generation of mid-2010s discrete mobile GPUs, with neither able to pull away from the pack.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in OpenCL compute workloads?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M420 wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 3956, which is 9.3% higher than the Intel HD Graphics 630’s 3587. AMD’s higher shading unit count (320 vs 192) and higher FP32 throughput (544.0 GFLOPS vs 384.0 GFLOPS) support this result.

Q: Does the Intel HD Graphics 630 have any benchmark advantage?

A: Yes. The Intel part scores 5099 in Geekbench Metal and 3540 in Geekbench Vulkan, while the AMD Radeon R5 M420 has no recorded scores for either test. This gives Intel a functional advantage in Metal-based and Vulkan-based applications.

Q: How do these GPUs compare to dedicated mobile GPUs from the same era?

A: Intel’s average score of 4075 places it 1% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M and 1.5% ahead of the AMD FirePro M4150. AMD’s average of 3956 is statistically tied with the NVIDIA GeForce 830M (0% delta) and 0.1% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GT 745M.

Q: What is the difference in global GPU percentile rankings?

A: The Intel HD Graphics 630 ranks at the 24th percentile of all GPUs, while the AMD Radeon R5 M420 ranks at the 23rd. This 1 percentile difference is negligible and confirms both parts occupy the same entry-level performance tier.

Q: Which GPU has better memory configuration for gaming?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M420 has a dedicated 4 GB DDR3 memory pool on a 64-bit bus with 16.00 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel HD Graphics 630 uses system shared memory with bandwidth described as "System Dependent," which means its performance is tied to the host system’s memory configuration.

Q: Are these GPUs still relevant for modern applications?

A: Both are marked as end-of-life products. The Intel part supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3, while AMD supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The Intel part has broader modern API coverage.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon R5 M420 wins in pure compute performance, as demonstrated by the 9.3% lead in Geekbench OpenCL. This advantage stems from its 320 shading units and 544.0 GFLOPS FP32 throughput, which are 66.7% and 41.7% higher than Intel’s respective figures. The dedicated 4 GB of DDR3 memory with 16.00 GB/s bandwidth also gives AMD a consistent memory performance baseline, unlike Intel’s system-shared memory whose bandwidth varies with the host platform. For tasks that rely heavily on OpenCL acceleration — such as video encoding, image processing, or physics simulations — the Radeon R5 M420 is the more capable part.

The Intel HD Graphics 630 wins in API compatibility and specific API performance. Its Geekbench Metal score of 5099 is the highest benchmark result for either part, and its Vulkan score of 3540 shows functional support for modern graphics APIs. Intel’s DirectX 12 (12_1) support is also a higher feature level than AMD’s DirectX 12 (11_1). For users running Metal-based applications (typical of macOS environments) or Vulkan-based games, the Intel part is the only viable option of the two, as AMD has no recorded results for these APIs. Additionally, Intel’s higher average benchmark score of 4075 versus AMD’s 3956 suggests that across a broader range of workloads, Intel is slightly more consistent.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ substantially in nearly every hardware specification. The Intel HD Graphics 630 uses a 14 nm++ process from Intel, while the AMD Radeon R5 M420 uses a 28 nm process from TSMC. AMD’s chip contains 690 million transistors on a 56 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 12.3M / mm²; Intel does not disclose transistor count or die size.

Clock speeds show AMD running significantly faster: the Radeon R5 M420 has a base clock of 780 MHz and a boost clock of 850 MHz, while the Intel HD Graphics 630 operates at a 350 MHz base and 1000 MHz boost. AMD’s memory clock is 1000 MHz (2 Gbps effective), whereas Intel uses system shared memory with no dedicated clock.

The compute configuration reverses the traditional hierarchy: AMD has 320 shading units and 8 ROPs, while Intel has 192 shading units and only 3 ROPs. However, Intel has more texture mapping units (24 vs 20) and achieves a higher texture rate (24.00 GTexel/s vs 17.00 GTexel/s). AMD leads in pixel rate (6.800 GPixel/s vs 3.000 GPixel/s) and FP32 throughput (544.0 GFLOPS vs 384.0 GFLOPS). Intel also lists FP16 capability at 768.0 GFLOPS (2:1), while AMD has no FP16 data.

Memory configuration is a major differentiator. AMD has 4 GB of dedicated DDR3 on a 64-bit bus with 16.00 GB/s bandwidth. Intel uses system shared memory for both size and type, with bandwidth described as "System Dependent." The bus interface also differs: Intel uses a Ring Bus, while AMD uses PCIe 3.0 x8.

Architecture Differences

Intel HD Graphics 630 is built on Generation 9.5 architecture with a Kaby Lake GT2 chip, representing Intel’s HD Graphics (Kaby Lake) generation. AMD Radeon R5 M420 uses GCN 1.0 architecture with a Jet chip, belonging to AMD’s Gem System (R5 M400) generation. These architectures represent fundamentally different design eras: Intel’s 14 nm++ process is a mature, power-efficient node, while AMD’s 28 nm process from TSMC is an older, less dense node.

The shading unit counts reflect architectural philosophy. AMD’s GCN 1.0 uses a wide, parallel design with 320 shading units that excel at batch compute but can struggle with latency-sensitive workloads. Intel’s Generation 9.5 uses 192 execution units arranged for balanced throughput, with a higher texture rate per shading unit. Intel’s support for FP16 at 768.0 GFLOPS (2:1 ratio) indicates a capability for half-precision compute that AMD’s GCN 1.0 lacks entirely.

API support shows Intel with a more modern feature set: DirectX 12 (12_1) versus AMD’s DirectX 12 (11_1), and Vulkan 1.3 versus AMD’s Vulkan 1.2.170. Both support OpenGL 4.6. Intel’s Metal benchmark result of 5099 confirms strong Apple ecosystem support, while AMD has no Metal data. The production status for both is end-of-life, with AMD’s predecessor listed as Solar System and successor as Polaris Mobile; Intel’s predecessor and successor are not specified.