AMD Radeon R5 M430 vs AMD Radeon R7 M340 Comparison

The AMD Radeon R7 M340 and AMD Radeon R5 M430 are two entry-level mobile graphics solutions from the Gem System generation, both now end-of-life. The benchmark data presents a fascinating split: each card claims victory in one of the two available tests, with the R7 M340 winning the Vulkan workload and the R5 M430 taking the OpenCL workload. Their average benchmark scores are remarkably close, differing by less than one percent, yet their architectural foundations are generations apart. This analysis explores what the numbers reveal about these two nearly matched competitors.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results show a clear division of labor. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the AMD Radeon R5 M430 scores 5152 against the R7 M340's 4932, a delta of -4.3% from the perspective of the R7 M340. This means the R5 M430 is approximately 4.5% faster in this compute-oriented workload. The R7 M340's average benchmark score of 5063 is actually lower than the R5 M430's OpenCL result, which suggests the R5 M430 has a particular strength in OpenCL compute tasks that goes beyond its overall average.

The tables turn in the Geekbench Vulkan test. Here, the AMD Radeon R7 M340 scores 5193, while the R5 M430 manages only 4884. This represents a 6.3% advantage for the R7 M340. The Vulkan delta is notably larger than the OpenCL gap, indicating the R7 M340's newer architecture handles this modern graphics API more efficiently. Interestingly, the R7 M340's Vulkan score of 5193 exceeds its OpenCL score of 4932, while the R5 M430 shows the opposite pattern, scoring 5152 in OpenCL but dropping to 4884 in Vulkan.

When looking at the nearest rivals data, both cards occupy the same performance tier. The R7 M340's average score of 5063 puts it exactly level with the AMD Radeon R7 240 (deltaPct 0) and just 0.6% ahead of the FirePro W4170M. The R5 M430's average of 5018 places it 0.3% behind the same FirePro W4170M and 0.8% ahead of the NVIDIA Quadro 4000. The direct comparison between the two shows the R7 M340 holding a 0.9% advantage in average score over the R5 M430. Both cards sit at the 30th percentile of all GPUs, confirming they are entry-level parts with similar overall standing.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 M340 leads with an average benchmark score of 5063, which is 0.9% higher than the R5 M430's 5018 average.

Q: How do the two cards compare in Vulkan performance?

A: The R7 M340 wins the Vulkan test decisively, scoring 5193 versus the R5 M430's 4884, a 6.3% advantage for the R7 M340.

Q: Does the R5 M430 win any benchmark test?

A: Yes, the R5 M430 takes the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 5152, beating the R7 M340's 4932 by 4.3%.

Q: Are these GPUs comparable to any desktop or professional parts?

A: The data shows the R7 M340 matches the AMD Radeon R7 240 exactly (deltaPct 0), while the R5 M430 is 0.4% ahead of the AMD Radeon R7 Graphics and 0.8% ahead of the NVIDIA Quadro 4000.

Q: What is the percentile ranking for these GPUs?

A: Both the AMD Radeon R7 M340 and the AMD Radeon R5 M430 are at the 30th percentile of all GPUs, placing them in the lower performance tier.

Q: How many benchmark wins does each card have?

A: Each card has exactly one win. The R7 M340 wins the Vulkan test, and the R5 M430 wins the OpenCL test, resulting in a 1-1 tie.

Architecture Differences

The fundamental architectural split between these two GPUs is significant. The AMD Radeon R7 M340 uses the Meso chip built on GCN 3.0 architecture, while the AMD Radeon R5 M430 uses the Jet chip with the older GCN 1.0 architecture. Both are manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC, but the transistor counts differ dramatically. The R7 M340 packs 1,550 million transistors on a 125 mm² die, whereas the R5 M430 has only 690 million transistors on a much smaller 56 mm² die. The transistor density is nearly identical at 12.4M per mm² for the R7 M340 and 12.3M per mm² for the R5 M430.

Clock speeds also tell a story of architectural efficiency. The R7 M340 runs at a base clock of 943 MHz with a boost up to 1021 MHz. The R5 M430 operates at a lower 780 MHz base and 855 MHz boost. Despite this clock disadvantage, the R5 M430 matches the R7 M340 in core configuration, with both featuring 320 shading units, 20 texture mapping units, and 8 render output units. The R7 M340's higher clocks translate directly into higher theoretical throughput: it achieves 653.4 GFLOPS of FP32 performance versus 547.2 GFLOPS for the R5 M430. Pixel rate follows the same pattern, with the R7 M340 hitting 8.168 GPixel/s compared to 6.840 GPixel/s for the R5 M430.

The R7 M340 also supports FP16 compute at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, both at 653.4 GFLOPS, while the R5 M430 lists no FP16 capability. API support differs as well: the R7 M340 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), while the R5 M430 only reaches DirectX 12 (11_1). Both cards support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.2.170. Memory configurations present another contrast: the R7 M340 comes with 2 GB of DDR3, while the R5 M430 doubles that to 4 GB. However, both use a 64-bit memory bus with 1000 MHz memory clocks and 2 Gbps effective speed, yielding identical 16.00 GB/s bandwidth. The R5 M430 is classified as an IGP with portable device dependent display outputs, while the R7 M340 has no such classification listed.

The Verdict

The benchmark data suggests that neither GPU is a clear winner. The R7 M340 holds a marginal 0.9% average score advantage, but the R5 M430 counters with a 4.3% lead in OpenCL. The R7 M340's 6.3% Vulkan advantage is more substantial, but it comes in a single test. For users prioritizing Vulkan-based workloads, the R7 M340 is the better choice. For those relying on OpenCL compute, the R5 M430 offers a measurable edge. The R7 M340's newer GCN 3.0 architecture with higher clock speeds and FP16 support suggests better overall efficiency, but the R5 M430's double memory capacity (4 GB versus 2 GB) could be relevant for certain workloads. Both cards sit at the 30th percentile, so neither offers compelling performance in absolute terms. The data indicates these are closely matched entry-level parts where the choice depends on the specific application rather than any overall superiority.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every major specification category. The R7 M340 uses the Meso chip with GCN 3.0 architecture, while the R5 M430 uses the Jet chip with GCN 1.0. Transistor count differs by more than a factor of two: 1,550 million for the R7 M340 versus 690 million for the R5 M430. Die size likewise varies from 125 mm² to 56 mm². Clock speeds are higher on the R7 M340, with a 943 MHz base and 1021 MHz boost, compared to 780 MHz base and 855 MHz boost on the R5 M430. The R7 M340 achieves 653.4 GFLOPS FP32 and 653.4 GFLOPS FP16 (1:1), while the R5 M430 manages 547.2 GFLOPS FP32 with no FP16 listing. Pixel rate is 8.168 GPixel/s for the R7 M340 versus 6.840 GPixel/s for the R5 M430. Texture rate follows suit at 20.42 GTexel/s versus 17.10 GTexel/s. Memory size differs at 2 GB for the R7 M340 and 4 GB for the R5 M430. DirectX support is 12 (12_0) for the R7 M340 and 12 (11_1) for the R5 M430. The R5 M430 is classified as an IGP with portable device dependent display outputs, a distinction not listed for the R7 M340. Release dates also differ, with the R7 M340 dated 2015-05-04 and no release date listed for the R5 M430.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon R7 M340 wins in scenarios that favor its GCN 3.0 architecture and higher clocks. Its 6.3% Vulkan advantage makes it the stronger choice for Vulkan-based applications, which benefit from the newer instruction set and higher throughput. The R7 M340 also leads in raw compute metrics, offering 653.4 GFLOPS FP32 versus 547.2 GFLOPS for the R5 M430, a 19.4% advantage. Its FP16 support at a 1:1 ratio could benefit workloads that utilize half-precision arithmetic. The R7 M340's higher pixel rate of 8.168 GPixel/s and texture rate of 20.42 GTexel/s suggest better fill-rate performance in graphics-heavy tasks. Its direct match with the AMD Radeon R7 240 (deltaPct 0) indicates parity with a known desktop part.

The AMD Radeon R5 M430 wins in the OpenCL compute arena, posting a 5152 score that is 4.3% higher than the R7 M340's result. This suggests its GCN 1.0 architecture handles OpenCL workloads efficiently despite lower clock speeds. The R5 M430's 4 GB memory capacity is double the R7 M340's 2 GB, which could provide an advantage in memory-intensive workloads where capacity matters more than bandwidth. The R5 M430 also maintains a closer competitive position to the FirePro W4170M (deltaPct -0.3) and beats the NVIDIA Quadro 4000 by 0.8%, showing it can hold its own against professional-grade parts in certain tests. For users whose applications rely on OpenCL, the R5 M430 offers a demonstrable benefit, even though its overall average score is lower by 0.9%. The R5 M430's IGP classification with portable device dependent outputs might also make it more suitable for specific laptop implementations where power efficiency is prioritized.