AMD Radeon R5 M435 vs Intel UHD Graphics P750 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains a single head-to-head benchmark for these two GPUs: Geekbench OpenCL. Intel UHD Graphics P750 posts a score of 6554, while AMD Radeon R5 M435 trails with 5859. That gives Intel a clear 11.9% advantage in this test, a meaningful margin for integrated graphics class hardware.

Context matters here. Intel UHD Graphics P750 sits at the 38th percentile among all GPUs in the database, while AMD Radeon R5 M435 lands at the 33rd percentile. The five-point percentile gap reflects the score difference, but it also shows that both parts occupy similar territory in the lower-midrange of the GPU population. Neither is a high-flying part, but Intel holds the edge.

Looking at the nearest rivals for each card sharpens the picture. Intel UHD Graphics P750’s closest competitor is AMD Radeon HD 7730M at 6581, which is only 0.4% faster. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670M scores 6513, 0.6% slower than the P750. AMD Radeon R7 M460 is 0.9% ahead at 6612, and NVIDIA GeForce GT 555M is 0.9% behind at 6493. The P750’s neighborhood is tight: all four rivals sit within roughly 1% of its score. That means the 11.9% win over the R5 M435 is not a fluke of a weak benchmark field, it is a genuine gap between these two specific parts.

AMD Radeon R5 M435’s rival cluster is similarly compact. AMD Radeon R7 M465 scores 5841, just 0.3% behind. Intel UHD Graphics 730 posts 5929, which is 1.2% faster. AMD Radeon HD 8730M hits 5955, 1.6% ahead, and NVIDIA Quadro K620M scores 5957, also 1.6% ahead. The R5 M435 is clearly a 5900-class performer, while the P750 is a 6500-class performer. The difference between those two tiers is exactly what the 11.9% delta represents.

In practical terms, the benchmark results indicate that Intel UHD Graphics P750 outperforms AMD Radeon R5 M435 by a comfortable margin in compute workloads measured by OpenCL. The P750’s 6554 score is closer to the AMD Radeon HD 7730M and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670M than it is to the R5 M435. Meanwhile, the R5 M435’s 5859 sits alongside older mobile parts like the HD 8730M and the Quadro K620M. The data is unambiguous: Intel wins the only head-to-head test on record, and it wins by nearly twelve percent.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations and different process nodes. Intel UHD Graphics P750 uses the Rocket Lake chip built on Generation 12.1 architecture, specifically the HD Graphics-W (Rocket Lake) generation. It is fabricated on a 14 nm+++ process at Intel’s own foundry. AMD Radeon R5 M435 uses the Jet chip with GCN 1.0 architecture, part of the Gem System (R5 M400) generation. It is built on a 28 nm process at TSMC. The process gap is significant: Intel’s 14 nm+++ is a more mature, refined node compared to AMD’s 28 nm, which is an older planar process.

AMD has published physical details for its chip. The R5 M435 packs 690 million transistors into a 56 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 12.3 million per square millimeter. Intel’s P750 has no transistor count or die size recorded in the database, so a direct density comparison is not possible. However, the architectural differences are extensive.

Shading unit counts differ. Intel UHD Graphics P750 has 256 shading units, while AMD Radeon R5 M435 has 320. That is 64 more shading units on the AMD side, a 25% advantage in raw shader count. Texture mapping units tell a different story: Intel has 64 TMUs against AMD’s 20, a 3.2x advantage for Intel. Render output units are also lopsided: Intel has 32 ROPs versus AMD’s 8, a 4x advantage. These ratios explain why Intel’s pixel rate is 41.60 GPixel/s versus AMD’s 8.240 GPixel/s, and why Intel’s texture rate is 83.20 GTexel/s versus AMD’s 20.60 GTexel/s. The P750 is built for much higher fill-rate throughput, while the R5 M435 relies on a higher shader count for compute-oriented tasks.

Clock speeds are reversed. AMD Radeon R5 M435 runs at a base clock of 780 MHz and boosts to 1030 MHz. Intel UHD Graphics P750 has a lower base of 350 MHz but a higher boost of 1300 MHz. The boost behavior matters: Intel’s part ramps aggressively to 1300 MHz, which is 26% higher than AMD’s boost. The base clocks suggest AMD runs more consistently at moderate speeds, while Intel relies on boost headroom.

Memory subsystems are entirely different. Intel UHD Graphics P750 uses system shared memory with system shared type, a system shared bus width, and bandwidth that is system dependent. AMD Radeon R5 M435 has dedicated 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 64-bit bus, delivering 36.00 GB/s bandwidth. The memory clock is 1125 MHz, or 4.5 Gbps effective. This is a classic split: integrated GPU stealing from system RAM versus discrete-class dedicated VRAM. The R5 M435’s dedicated memory gives it predictable bandwidth, while the P750’s performance depends on the host system’s memory configuration.

API support differs in details. Intel UHD Graphics P750 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. AMD Radeon R5 M435 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The DirectX feature level gap (12_1 versus 11_1) is notable, as is the Vulkan version difference (1.4 versus 1.2.170). Both support modern APIs, but Intel’s implementation is newer.

Bus interface also differs. Intel UHD Graphics P750 uses a Ring Bus, while AMD Radeon R5 M435 uses PCIe 3.0 x8. The Ring Bus reflects Intel’s integrated design, where the GPU is fused into the CPU and communicates over the internal ring interconnect. The PCIe 3.0 x8 interface on AMD’s part suggests a mobile discrete or embedded design that connects through the PCIe bus.

Where Each One Wins

Intel UHD Graphics P750 wins in the measured compute benchmark, and the architecture data suggests several specific strengths. The 41.60 GPixel/s pixel rate versus 8.240 GPixel/s gives Intel a massive fill-rate advantage, which matters for resolution-heavy workloads like high-polygon scenes, post-processing effects, and render target bound operations. The 83.20 GTexel/s texture rate versus 20.60 GTexel/s similarly favors Intel in texture-heavy rendering. The 32 ROPs versus 8 ROPs amplifies this: Intel can drive more pixels through the raster pipeline in parallel. The 64 TMUs versus 20 TMUs also supports higher texture fetch throughput.

AMD Radeon R5 M435 has its own advantages in the architecture. The 320 shading units versus 256 gives AMD a 25% shader count lead, which can translate to better performance in compute-bound or shader-bound workloads where the bottleneck is ALU throughput rather than memory bandwidth or fill rate. The dedicated 2 GB GDDR5 memory with 36.00 GB/s bandwidth is a structural advantage over Intel’s system shared memory, since the P750’s memory performance is system dependent and may be limited by the host CPU’s memory controller and RAM speed. In gaming scenarios, dedicated VRAM typically provides more consistent frame pacing than shared memory.

The release timeline also separates them. AMD Radeon R5 M435 has a recorded release date of May 14, 2016. Intel UHD Graphics P750 has no release date in the database, but its Rocket Lake chip and Generation 12.1 architecture place it later in the product cycle. AMD’s predecessor is listed as Solar System and its successor as Polaris Mobile, while Intel’s predecessor and successor fields are empty. Both are end-of-life products.

For use cases, the data suggests Intel UHD Graphics P750 is the better choice for integrated graphics duties where fill-rate and texture throughput dominate, such as desktop compositing, lightweight 3D applications, and older DirectX 12 titles that can exploit the 12_1 feature level. AMD Radeon R5 M435 is better suited for scenarios where dedicated VRAM and higher shader count matter, such as certain compute workloads or games that are shader-limited. The 11.9% OpenCL win for Intel, though, is the only direct performance data, and it favors Intel overall.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU scores higher in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: Intel UHD Graphics P750 scores 6554, while AMD Radeon R5 M435 scores 5859. Intel wins by 11.9%.

Q: What are the nearest rivals for Intel UHD Graphics P750?

A: AMD Radeon HD 7730M (6581, 0.4% faster), NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670M (6513, 0.6% slower), AMD Radeon R7 M460 (6612, 0.9% faster), and NVIDIA GeForce GT 555M (6493, 0.9% slower).

Q: What are the nearest rivals for AMD Radeon R5 M435?

A: AMD Radeon R7 M465 (5841, 0.3% slower), Intel UHD Graphics 730 (5929, 1.2% faster), AMD Radeon HD 8730M (5955, 1.6% faster), and NVIDIA Quadro K620M (5957, 1.6% faster).

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: AMD Radeon R5 M435 has 320 shading units, while Intel UHD Graphics P750 has 256. AMD has 64 more shading units.

Q: Which GPU has higher pixel and texture rates?

A: Intel UHD Graphics P750 has a pixel rate of 41.60 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 83.20 GTexel/s. AMD Radeon R5 M435 has a pixel rate of 8.240 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 20.60 GTexel/s.

Q: What memory configurations do the two GPUs use?

A: Intel UHD Graphics P750 uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth. AMD Radeon R5 M435 uses 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 64-bit bus with 36.00 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What process nodes are used by each GPU?

A: Intel UHD Graphics P750 is built on a 14 nm+++ process at Intel. AMD Radeon R5 M435 is built on a 28 nm process at TSMC.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel UHD Graphics P750 | AMD Radeon R5 M435 |

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

| Manufacturer | Intel | AMD |

| Chip | Rocket Lake | Jet |

| Architecture | Generation 12.1 | GCN 1.0 |

| Generation | HD Graphics-W (Rocket Lake) | Gem System (R5 M400) |

| Process Node | 14 nm+++ | 28 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Transistors | Not recorded | 690 million |

| Die Size | Not recorded | 56 mm² |

| Transistor Density | Not recorded | 12.3M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 350 MHz | 780 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1300 MHz | 1030 MHz |

| Memory Size | System Shared | 2 GB |

| Memory Type | System Shared | GDDR5 |

| Memory Bus Width | System Shared | 64 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | System Dependent | 36.00 GB/s |

| Memory Clock | System Shared | 1125 MHz (4.5 Gbps effective) |

| Shading Units | 256 | 320 |

| TMUs | 64 | 20 |

| ROPs | 32 | 8 |

| Pixel Rate | 41.60 GPixel/s | 8.240 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 83.20 GTexel/s | 20.60 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 665.6 GFLOPS | 659.2 GFLOPS |

| FP16 | 1,331.2 GFLOPS (2:1) | Not recorded |

| TDP | 15 W | Not recorded |

| Slot Width | IGP | IGP |

| Bus Interface | Ring Bus | PCIe 3.0 x8 |

| Display Outputs | Motherboard Dependent | Portable Device Dependent |

| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 (11_1) |

| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |

| Vulkan | 1.4 | 1.2.170 |

| Release Date | Not recorded | 2016-05-14 |

| Predecessor | Not recorded | Solar System |

| Successor | Not recorded | Polaris Mobile |

| Production Status | End-of-life | End-of-life |

| Geekbench OpenCL | 6554 | 5859 |

| Percentile | 38 | 33 |

The FP32 figures are nearly identical: 665.6 GFLOPS for Intel versus 659.2 GFLOPS for AMD, a difference of less than 1%. Intel’s FP16 rate is 1,331.2 GFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio, while AMD’s FP16 is not recorded. TDP is listed as 15 W for Intel and is not recorded for AMD. Both are end-of-life products with IGP slot width, meaning neither requires a dedicated expansion slot. The release date for AMD is May 14, 2016; Intel’s is not recorded. Predecessor and successor designations exist only for AMD, with Solar System and Polaris Mobile respectively. Intel’s display outputs are motherboard dependent, while AMD’s are portable device dependent, reflecting their different integration targets.