AMD Radeon R5 M420 vs Intel HD Graphics P4600 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The sole recorded benchmark in the database is Geekbench OpenCL, and the results place the AMD Radeon R5 M420 clearly ahead of the Intel HD Graphics P4600. The AMD part scores 3,956, while the Intel part scores 3,389. That represents a 16.7% advantage for the AMD Radeon R5 M420, a meaningful gap in raw compute throughput.

To contextualize this, the AMD Radeon R5 M420 sits within a tight competitive cluster. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce 830M, averages 3,957, a delta of 0%. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 745M trails by a hair at 3,953, a 0.1% difference in favor of the AMD part. The AMD Radeon HD 6850 X2 posts 3,977, which puts the R5 M420 0.5% behind that older dual-GPU card. The NVIDIA Quadro K2000 scores 3,964, meaning the R5 M420 is 0.2% off that workstation part. In short, the R5 M420 lands squarely in a narrow band of mid-range mobile and legacy desktop GPUs, with none of its four nearest rivals separating themselves by more than half a percentage point.

The Intel HD Graphics P4600, by contrast, occupies a lower tier. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce GT 740, averages 3,431, which is 1.2% higher than the Intel part. The NVIDIA Quadro 2000M scores 3,434, a 1.3% edge. On the other side, the Intel HD Graphics 530 trails at 3,332, meaning the P4600 is 1.7% faster than that newer integrated GPU. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 730M sits at 3,316, and the P4600 beats it by 2.2%. The P4600 is therefore competitive with entry-level discrete GPUs from the same era, but it does not approach the performance level of the AMD Radeon R5 M420.

The head-to-head comparison confirms this: the AMD part wins the only test, with a delta of 16.7%. This is not a marginal victory; it is a substantial lead that will show up in real workloads. The percentile rankings reinforce the divide. The R5 M420 sits at the 23rd percentile among all GPUs in the database, while the P4600 sits at the 20th percentile. That three-point percentile gap understates the raw score difference because the database includes many far faster cards, but it still places the AMD part in a higher performance bracket.

For users looking at compute tasks such as OpenCL-accelerated encoding, image processing, or physics simulations, the 16.7% advantage translates directly into shorter wait times. The gap is not large enough to call the R5 M420 a mid-range part, but it is enough to separate it from the integrated Intel solution.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M420 scores 3,956 versus 3,389 for the Intel HD Graphics P4600, giving the AMD part a 16.7% lead in the single recorded benchmark.

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

A: The R5 M420 is effectively tied with the NVIDIA GeForce 830M (3,957, 0% delta) and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 745M (3,953, 0.1% faster). It is 0.2% behind the NVIDIA Quadro K2000 (3,964) and 0.5% behind the AMD Radeon HD 6850 X2 (3,977).

Q: Where does the Intel HD Graphics P4600 rank among its nearest competitors?

A: The P4600 is 1.2% slower than the NVIDIA GeForce GT 740 (3,431) and 1.3% slower than the NVIDIA Quadro 2000M (3,434). It is 1.7% faster than the Intel HD Graphics 530 (3,332) and 2.2% faster than the NVIDIA GeForce GT 730M (3,316).

Q: What is the memory configuration of each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M420 uses 4 GB of DDR3 memory on a 64-bit bus, delivering 16.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel HD Graphics P4600 uses system-shared memory, with the bus width and bandwidth listed as system dependent.

Q: What API levels does each GPU support?

A: Both support DirectX 12 (11_1) and OpenGL 4.6 is available on the AMD part, while the Intel part supports OpenGL 4.3. For Vulkan, the AMD part supports version 1.2.170, whereas the Intel part supports version 1.0.

Q: What are the pixel and texture rates for these two GPUs?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M420 has a pixel rate of 6.800 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 17.00 GTexel/s. The Intel HD Graphics P4600 has a pixel rate of 2.400 GPixel/s but a higher texture rate of 24.00 GTexel/s.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon R5 M420 wins the only benchmark that matters in this comparison. Its 3,956 Geekbench OpenCL score versus 3,389 for the Intel part is a clear, unambiguous result. For any workload that relies on OpenCL compute, the R5 M420 is the stronger choice. The 16.7% delta means that tasks such as GPU-accelerated video encoding, image filtering, or general-purpose compute will finish noticeably faster on the AMD part.

The pixel rate also favors the AMD part. At 6.800 GPixel/s, the R5 M420 outputs nearly three times the pixels per second of the Intel HD Graphics P4600, which manages only 2.400 GPixel/s. This suggests that fill-rate-bound scenarios, such as high-resolution rendering or heavy fragment shader work, will see a significant advantage on the AMD side.

However, the Intel part does hold one advantage in the specification sheet: texture rate. The P4600 achieves 24.00 GTexel/s, while the R5 M420 delivers 17.00 GTexel/s. That is a 41% higher texture throughput for the Intel GPU. In workloads that are heavily texture-sample-bound, such as certain types of 3D scene rendering or texture-heavy post-processing, the Intel part could potentially close the gap or even pull ahead, despite its lower raw compute score.

The Intel part also has a higher boost clock. It starts at 350 MHz and boosts to 1200 MHz, whereas the AMD part runs at a base of 780 MHz and boosts to 850 MHz. The Intel part's boost is 350 MHz higher, which helps explain its texture rate advantage despite having half the shading units. The AMD part compensates with 320 shading units versus 160 for the Intel part, doubling the raw shader count.

For users who need a discrete GPU with dedicated memory, the AMD Radeon R5 M420 is the only option here. It has 4 GB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus, while the Intel part relies entirely on system memory. In any scenario where memory bandwidth is critical, the AMD part's fixed 16.00 GB/s allocation is more predictable than the system-dependent behavior of the Intel GPU.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every core specification. The AMD Radeon R5 M420 is built on a 28 nm process at TSMC, with 690 million transistors on a 56 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 12.3 million per square millimeter. The Intel HD Graphics P4600 is built on a 22 nm process at Intel, but the database does not record its transistor count, die size, or density.

Clock behavior differs substantially. The AMD part has a base clock of 780 MHz and a boost clock of 850 MHz, with memory clocked at 1000 MHz or 2 Gbps effective. The Intel part has a base clock of 350 MHz and a boost clock of 1200 MHz, with memory listed as system shared.

Memory configuration is a major differentiator. The AMD part has 4 GB of dedicated DDR3 memory on a 64-bit bus, with a fixed bandwidth of 16.00 GB/s. The Intel part uses system shared memory, with type, bus width, and bandwidth all system dependent.

Shader resources also differ. The AMD part has 320 shading units, 20 texture mapping units, and 8 ROPs. The Intel part has 160 shading units, 20 texture mapping units, and only 2 ROPs. The texture unit count is identical, but the ROP count is four times higher on the AMD side.

Pixel and texture rates follow from these configurations. The AMD part produces 6.800 GPixel/s and 17.00 GTexel/s. The Intel part produces 2.400 GPixel/s and 24.00 GTexel/s.

The AMD part supports OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.2.170, while the Intel part supports OpenGL 4.3 and Vulkan 1.0. Both support DirectX 12 (11_1).

The Intel part has a recorded TDP of 84 W, while the AMD part has no TDP listed. Both are IGP form factors, with the AMD part using PCIe 3.0 x8 and the Intel part using a Ring Bus interface. Display outputs are portable device dependent for AMD and motherboard dependent for Intel.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon R5 M420 is based on the Jet chip using the GCN 1.0 architecture. It belongs to the Gem System generation under the R5 M400 family. The Intel HD Graphics P4600 uses the Haswell GT2 chip and is part of the Generation 7.5 architecture, in the HD Graphics-W (Haswell) generation.

The process nodes differ: AMD uses 28 nm at TSMC, Intel uses 22 nm at its own foundry. The AMD part has a fully specified transistor count of 690 million on a 56 mm² die, while the Intel part has no transistor or die size data in the database.

The shading architecture is fundamentally different. AMD's GCN 1.0 design packs 320 shaders, which is double the 160 shaders found in Intel's Generation 7.5 design. This explains the AMD part's higher FP32 throughput of 544.0 GFLOPS versus 384.0 GFLOPS for the Intel part, a 41.7% advantage.

The ROP and texture balance is also asymmetric. The AMD part has 8 ROPs, the Intel part has 2. The AMD part has 20 TMUs, the Intel part also has 20. The Intel part compensates with a much higher boost clock (1200 MHz versus 850 MHz), which drives its texture rate to 24.00 GTexel/s, above the AMD part's 17.00 GTexel/s. The lower ROP count, however, caps the Intel part's pixel throughput at 2.400 GPixel/s.

Memory architecture is another key split. The AMD part uses dedicated DDR3 with a fixed 64-bit bus and 16.00 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel part shares system memory, making its bandwidth dependent on the host platform. This gives the AMD part a consistency advantage in memory-bound workloads.

API support differs by generation. The AMD part supports Vulkan 1.2.170 and OpenGL 4.6, while the Intel part supports Vulkan 1.0 and OpenGL 4.3. Both are modern enough for most applications, but the AMD part has a broader compatibility profile for newer Vulkan titles.

Release dates place the Intel part earlier, at May 2013, while the AMD part arrived in May 2016. Both are end-of-life products now. The AMD part lists its predecessor as Solar System and successor as Polaris Mobile, while the Intel part has no recorded predecessor or successor.

The Verdict

The data points to the AMD Radeon R5 M420 as the stronger GPU for general compute workloads. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 3,956 beats the Intel HD Graphics P4600's 3,389 by 16.7%, and its FP32 throughput of 544.0 GFLOPS is 41.7% higher than the Intel part's 384.0 GFLOPS. The AMD part also has twice the shading units, four times the ROPs, and dedicated memory with a fixed bandwidth of 16.00 GB/s.

The Intel HD Graphics P4600 is not without merit. Its texture rate of 24.00 GTexel/s exceeds the AMD part's 17.00 GTexel/s, and its boost clock of 1200 MHz is higher. For texture-heavy rendering where pixel throughput is not the bottleneck, the Intel part could hold its own. It also has a recorded TDP of 84 W, though the AMD part has no TDP figure in the database, so a direct power comparison is not possible.

Users should choose the AMD Radeon R5 M420 if they prioritize raw compute performance, higher pixel throughput, or dedicated memory with predictable bandwidth. It is the better choice for OpenCL-based acceleration and any workload that benefits from more shading units and ROPs. The 23rd percentile placement among all GPUs, while modest, is still three points above the Intel part's 20th percentile.

Users should choose the Intel HD Graphics P4600 if they are in a texture-bound scenario or if the system integration matters more than raw compute. Its higher texture rate and boost clock give it an edge in specific rendering paths, and its system-shared memory model means no dedicated VRAM allocation is needed. For most general-purpose tasks, however, the benchmark data clearly favors the AMD part.

The verdict is straightforward: the AMD Radeon R5 M420 wins this comparison on the strength of its 16.7% OpenCL lead, its doubled shader count, and its dedicated memory configuration. The Intel HD Graphics P4600 remains a capable integrated solution, but the recorded data does not show it overtaking the AMD part in any measured benchmark.