AMD Radeon R5 M430 vs AMD Radeon R7 M260X Comparison

AMD Radeon R7 M260X and AMD Radeon R5 M430 are both end-of-life mobile GPUs built on the same GCN 1.0 architecture and 28 nm TSMC process, but they target different corners of the laptop market. The R7 M260X is the older, larger chip with a GDDR5 memory interface, while the R5 M430 is a newer, smaller part with DDR3 memory and a higher core clock. Benchmark data shows a near-total performance split: the R7 M260X leads in OpenCL compute workloads by a solid margin, while the R5 M430 counters with a win in Vulkan graphics tests. Neither card escapes the 30th percentile of all GPUs, placing both firmly in entry-level territory for light gaming and general acceleration.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs share the same fundamental DNA: both use AMD’s Graphics Core Next 1.0 architecture, are fabricated by TSMC on a 28 nm process, and feature identical transistor density of 12.3M per mm². The differences begin with the physical chip. The R7 M260X uses the Opal die, which packs 950 million transistors into a 77 mm² footprint. The R5 M430 uses the smaller Jet die, with 690 million transistors on 56 mm². That 260-million-transistor gap translates directly into compute resources: the R7 M260X has 384 shading units, 24 texture mapping units, and 8 ROPs, while the R5 M430 scales down to 320 shading units, 20 TMUs, and the same 8 ROPs.

Clock speeds tell the opposite story. The R5 M430 runs at a base of 780 MHz and boosts to 855 MHz, while the R7 M260X sits at 620 MHz base and 715 MHz boost. This higher clock rate lets the smaller chip nearly match the larger one in raw throughput. Pixel rate favors the R5 M430 at 6.840 GPixel/s versus 5.720 GPixel/s for the R7 M260X, but texture rates are almost identical: 17.10 GTexel/s versus 17.16 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is a virtual tie, with the R5 M430 posting 547.2 GFLOPS against the R7 M260X’s 549.1 GFLOPS.

Memory is where the architectures diverge most starkly. The R7 M260X uses 1024 MB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 64.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The R5 M430 uses 4 GB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus, yielding just 16.00 GB/s — a quarter of the bandwidth. Both run memory at 1000 MHz, but effective rates differ: 4 Gbps for GDDR5 versus 2 Gbps for DDR3. The R5 M430 compensates with four times the capacity, which matters for texture-heavy workloads but not for raw throughput. Both are PCIe 3.0 x8 parts with portable-device-dependent display outputs, and both support DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170.

Where Each One Wins

The R7 M260X wins in compute-heavy scenarios that benefit from memory bandwidth. Its GDDR5 interface and 128-bit bus provide four times the bandwidth of the R5 M430’s DDR3 setup, which shows in the OpenCL benchmark where it scores 10.4% higher. This makes it the better choice for OpenCL-accelerated applications, such as video encoding, physics calculations, or any workload that streams large datasets through the GPU. The larger die also provides more shading units and TMUs, which helps in traditional pixel-pushing tasks even if the clock deficit reduces the advantage.

The R5 M430 wins in Vulkan-based workloads, as evidenced by its 5.2% lead in that specific benchmark. The higher core clocks (780/855 MHz versus 620/715 MHz) give it an edge in draw-call-heavy or latency-sensitive scenarios where raw compute throughput is less important than per-clock efficiency. The 4 GB memory capacity is also a practical advantage for modern games that exceed 1 GB of VRAM, even though the narrow 64-bit bus limits how fast that memory can be accessed. For users running Vulkan titles or needing more framebuffer headroom, the R5 M430 is the more capable part.

Neither GPU wins outright in the overall average. The R7 M260X posts an average benchmark score of 5161 against the R5 M430’s 5018, a difference of roughly 2.8%. Both sit at the 30th percentile of all GPUs, meaning they perform similarly against the broader market. The R7 M260X’s nearest rival is the NVIDIA Quadro K3100M (0.1% ahead) and the AMD Radeon R7 240 (1.9% behind), while the R5 M430 falls just short of the AMD FirePro W4170M (0.3% behind) and beats the AMD Radeon R7 Graphics by 0.4%.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Geekbench OpenCL test shows the R7 M260X’s bandwidth advantage in action. It scores 5690 against the R5 M430’s 5152, a delta of 10.4%. This is the largest performance gap between the two cards in any benchmark. The result aligns with the hardware: the R7 M260X’s 64.00 GB/s of GDDR5 bandwidth is four times the R5 M430’s 16.00 GB/s, and the extra 64 shading units and 4 TMUs provide additional compute headroom. In OpenCL workloads that saturate memory, the R7 M260X is clearly the stronger part, despite its lower clocks.

The Geekbench Vulkan test flips the result. Here the R5 M430 scores 4884 against the R7 M260X’s 4631, a 5.2% lead. This win is likely driven by the R5 M430’s higher boost clock of 855 MHz versus 715 MHz, which improves per-thread execution and reduces latency in Vulkan’s explicit command model. The R5 M430 also has a higher pixel rate (6.840 GPixel/s versus 5.720 GPixel/s), which can help in fill-rate-bound scenes. The R7 M260X’s bandwidth advantage is less relevant in Vulkan tests that are compute-bound rather than memory-bound.

The two benchmark results are nearly mirror images: the R7 M260X wins by 10.4% in OpenCL, and the R5 M430 wins by 5.2% in Vulkan. The average benchmark scores reflect this split, with the R7 M260X at 5161 and the R5 M430 at 5018. The R7 M260X’s nearest rival, the NVIDIA Quadro K3100M, scores 5154 — just 0.1% away — while the R5 M430’s closest competitor, the AMD FirePro W4170M, scores 5034, placing it 0.3% ahead. Both cards trade blows with NVIDIA’s Quadro 4000M, which scores 5211 and beats the R7 M260X by 1%, and the Quadro 4000, which scores 4979 and trails the R5 M430 by 0.8%.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 M260X has 384 shading units, compared to 320 on the AMD Radeon R5 M430.

Q: Does the R5 M430 have faster memory?

A: No. The R7 M260X uses GDDR5 at 4 Gbps effective on a 128-bit bus for 64.00 GB/s bandwidth. The R5 M430 uses DDR3 at 2 Gbps effective on a 64-bit bus for 16.00 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which card wins in OpenCL performance?

A: The R7 M260X wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 5690 versus 5152 for the R5 M430, a 10.4% advantage.

Q: Which card wins in Vulkan performance?

A: The R5 M430 wins the Geekbench Vulkan test with a score of 4884 versus 4631 for the R7 M260X, a 5.2% lead.

Q: How much VRAM does each card have?

A: The R7 M260X has 1024 MB of GDDR5, while the R5 M430 has 4 GB of DDR3.

Q: Are both cards the same architecture?

A: Yes, both use GCN 1.0 architecture and are built on TSMC’s 28 nm process, but they use different dies: Opal for the R7 M260X and Jet for the R5 M430.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split based on workload type. If your priority is OpenCL compute performance, the AMD Radeon R7 M260X is the pick. Its 10.4% lead in the OpenCL benchmark, combined with four times the memory bandwidth (64.00 GB/s versus 16.00 GB/s) and more shading units (384 versus 320), makes it the stronger choice for GPU-accelerated applications that rely on bandwidth and parallel throughput. The R7 M260X also has a slightly higher average benchmark score (5161 versus 5018) and sits level with the R7 240 in performance.

If you prioritize Vulkan gaming or need more VRAM, the AMD Radeon R5 M430 is the better option. It wins the Vulkan benchmark by 5.2% and offers 4 GB of memory versus 1 GB, which is a practical advantage for modern titles with larger texture sets. The higher core clocks (780/855 MHz versus 620/715 MHz) give it better per-clock performance, and its pixel rate is 19.6% higher (6.840 GPixel/s versus 5.720 GPixel/s). Its average score trails by only 2.8%, making the gap small enough that the Vulkan win and VRAM capacity tip the balance for gaming use.

Neither card is a performance leader — both sit at the 30th percentile of all GPUs. The R7 M260X trades blows with the NVIDIA Quadro K3100M (0.1% ahead) and Quadro 4000M (1% behind), while the R5 M430 matches the AMD FirePro W4170M (0.3% behind) and beats the R7 Graphics by 0.4%. For a laptop buyer, the choice comes down to whether you need OpenCL throughput (choose the R7 M260X) or Vulkan performance with more memory (choose the R5 M430). In mixed workloads, the R7 M260X’s higher average score gives it a slight overall edge.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon R7 M260X | AMD Radeon R5 M430 |

|---|---|---|

| Chip | Opal | Jet |

| Generation | Gem System (R7 M200) | Gem System (R5 M400) |

| Transistors | 950 million | 690 million |

| Die Size | 77 mm² | 56 mm² |

| Base Clock | 620 MHz | 780 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 715 MHz | 855 MHz |

| Memory Size | 1024 MB | 4 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | DDR3 |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 64 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 64.00 GB/s | 16.00 GB/s |

| Effective Memory Clock | 4 Gbps | 2 Gbps |

| Shading Units | 384 | 320 |

| TMUs | 24 | 20 |

| Pixel Rate | 5.720 GPixel/s | 6.840 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 17.16 GTexel/s | 17.10 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 549.1 GFLOPS | 547.2 GFLOPS |

| Slot Width | Not specified | IGP |

| Power Connectors | None | Not specified |

| Release Date | 2015-12-05 | Not specified |