AMD Radeon R5 M435 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580M Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only recorded benchmark in the database for this pairing is Geekbench OpenCL, and it favors the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580M. The score is 6389 for the GTX 580M versus 5859 for the AMD Radeon R5 M435, a delta of 9%. This places the GTX 580M ahead by a meaningful margin, though not an overwhelming one. In practical terms, a 9% lead in a compute-oriented workload like OpenCL suggests the GTX 580M can sustain higher throughput on general-purpose GPU tasks, but the gap is narrow enough that the AMD card remains competitive in specific scenarios.

The GTX 580M’s nearest rival in the database is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 SE, which matches its score exactly at 6389, a delta of 0%. This means the GTX 580M is effectively tied with a previous-generation desktop part in raw OpenCL performance. Meanwhile, the AMD Radeon R5 M435 sits close to several other mobile and entry-level parts: the AMD Radeon R7 M465 scores 5841 (0.3% lower), the Intel UHD Graphics 730 scores 5929 (1.2% higher), the AMD Radeon HD 8730M scores 5955 (1.6% higher), and the NVIDIA Quadro K620M scores 5957 (1.6% higher). The R5 M435 is therefore at the lower end of its immediate competitive cluster, trailing several rivals by small margins.

The head-to-head delta of 9% is consistent with the percentile rankings. The GTX 580M sits at the 37th percentile among all GPUs in the database, while the R5 M435 sits at the 33rd percentile. That four-percentage-point difference in percentile terms reflects a modest but real separation in overall performance. The GTX 580M is not a high-end part by any stretch, but it does outrank the R5 M435 in the database’s distribution of scores.

Delving into the numbers, the GTX 580M’s advantage in FP32 compute is substantial. It delivers 952.3 GFLOPS against the R5 M435’s 659.2 GFLOPS, which is roughly 44% higher on paper. Yet the actual OpenCL score difference is only 9%, indicating that real-world workloads do not scale perfectly with theoretical peak throughput. This could be due to memory bandwidth constraints, driver overhead, or the specific nature of the OpenCL test. The GTX 580M has 96.00 GB/s of bandwidth versus 36.00 GB/s for the R5 M435, so the NVIDIA part should have a significant edge in memory-bound tasks. The 9% benchmark delta, however, suggests that the R5 M435’s architecture is more efficient per unit of bandwidth or that the test is not purely memory-limited.

Another way to interpret the data: the GTX 580M wins the only head-to-head test, so it takes all wins in this comparison (1 win versus 0 for the AMD part). The R5 M435 has no recorded victory in any benchmark within this pairing. The database shows no other tests, so the analysis must rest on this single data point. The GTX 580M’s higher pixel rate (9.920 GPixel/s versus 8.240 GPixel/s) and texture rate (39.68 GTexel/s versus 20.60 GTexel/s) reinforce its lead in fill-rate-heavy workloads, but again, the OpenCL score is the only measured outcome.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different eras and design philosophies. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580M uses the GF114 chip, built on the Fermi 2.0 architecture, and is fabricated on TSMC’s 40 nm process. The AMD Radeon R5 M435 uses the Jet chip, based on GCN 1.0, and is manufactured on TSMC’s 28 nm process. The newer process node for AMD allows for a much smaller die: 56 mm² versus 332 mm² for NVIDIA. Despite the larger die, the GTX 580M packs more transistors: 1,950 million versus 690 million. Transistor density tells the opposite story, with the R5 M435 achieving 12.3M transistors per mm² versus 5.9M per mm² for the GTX 580M. This reflects the generational leap in manufacturing efficiency.

The memory subsystems diverge sharply. The GTX 580M uses a 256-bit bus with 2 GB of GDDR5 at 750 MHz (3 Gbps effective), yielding 96.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The R5 M435 also uses 2 GB of GDDR5, but on a 64-bit bus with a 1125 MHz clock (4.5 Gbps effective), resulting in only 36.00 GB/s. The GTX 580M’s fourfold wider bus gives it a massive bandwidth advantage, which is typical for a higher-tier mobile part from 2011 versus an entry-level integrated-style part from 2016.

Shader resources also differ. The GTX 580M has 384 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The R5 M435 has 320 shading units, 20 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. The GTX 580M leads in every count, but the ratios are telling: the GTX 580M has a 3.2:1 ratio of TMUs to ROPs, while the R5 M435 has 2.5:1. This suggests NVIDIA allocated more hardware to texture work relative to pixel output. The GTX 580M’s texture rate of 39.68 GTexel/s is nearly double the R5 M435’s 20.60 GTexel/s, while its pixel rate is about 20% higher (9.920 GPixel/s versus 8.240 GPixel/s).

Clock speeds show a different pattern. The GTX 580M has no base or boost clock listed in the database, only a memory clock. The R5 M435 has a base clock of 780 MHz and a boost clock of 1030 MHz. This means the AMD part can dynamically raise its frequency, while the NVIDIA part’s core clock is unspecified. In terms of memory clock, the R5 M435 runs at 1125 MHz (4.5 Gbps effective) versus the GTX 580M’s 750 MHz (3 Gbps effective), but the GTX 580M compensates with its wider bus.

API support differs as well. The GTX 580M supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, with no Vulkan listed. The R5 M435 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. This gives the AMD part a feature advantage in modern Vulkan titles, though the GTX 580M’s DirectX 11_0 limitation may affect some newer DX12 features. The R5 M435 also has a more recent release date (May 2016 versus June 2011), which explains its support for newer APIs.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher OpenCL benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580M scores 6389, while the AMD Radeon R5 M435 scores 5859. The GTX 580M leads by 9%.

Q: How does the memory bandwidth compare between the two?

A: The GTX 580M has 96.00 GB/s of bandwidth, while the R5 M435 has 36.00 GB/s. The GTX 580M’s 256-bit bus is the key factor.

Q: What are the pixel and texture rates for each GPU?

A: The GTX 580M achieves 9.920 GPixel/s and 39.68 GTexel/s. The R5 M435 achieves 8.240 GPixel/s and 20.60 GTexel/s.

Q: Does the R5 M435 support Vulkan?

A: Yes, the R5 M435 supports Vulkan version 1.2.170. The GTX 580M has no Vulkan support listed in the database.

Q: What are the process nodes for these chips?

A: The GTX 580M is built on a 40 nm process, while the R5 M435 is built on a 28 nm process. Both are fabricated by TSMC.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The GTX 580M has 384 shading units, compared to 320 for the R5 M435.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every core specification. The GTX 580M uses the GF114 chip with Fermi 2.0 architecture, while the R5 M435 uses the Jet chip with GCN 1.0. The process nodes are 40 nm versus 28 nm, with transistor counts of 1,950 million versus 690 million and die sizes of 332 mm² versus 56 mm². Transistor density is 5.9M per mm² for NVIDIA versus 12.3M per mm² for AMD.

Memory configurations are starkly different: both have 2 GB of GDDR5, but the bus width is 256-bit for the GTX 580M versus 64-bit for the R5 M435. Bandwidth is 96.00 GB/s versus 36.00 GB/s. The memory clock is 750 MHz (3 Gbps effective) for NVIDIA versus 1125 MHz (4.5 Gbps effective) for AMD.

Core counts vary: 384 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs for the GTX 580M; 320 shading units, 20 TMUs, and 8 ROPs for the R5 M435. Pixel rate is 9.920 GPixel/s versus 8.240 GPixel/s, and texture rate is 39.68 GTexel/s versus 20.60 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 952.3 GFLOPS versus 659.2 GFLOPS.

Power and interface details also differ. The GTX 580M has a TDP of 100 W and uses an MXM Module slot with MXM-B (3.0) bus interface. The R5 M435 has no TDP listed and uses an IGP slot with PCIe 3.0 x8 bus interface. The GTX 580M has no power connectors listed, while the R5 M435 has none listed as well. Display outputs are portable device dependent for both.

API support is a point of divergence: DirectX 12 (11_0) for NVIDIA versus DirectX 12 (11_1) for AMD, but both support OpenGL 4.6. Vulkan is only listed for the R5 M435 (version 1.2.170). Release dates are June 2011 for the GTX 580M and May 2016 for the R5 M435. Production status is end-of-life for both.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580M wins the only benchmark in this comparison. The 9% lead in OpenCL suggests it is better suited for compute-heavy tasks that use the full GPU, such as general-purpose GPGPU workloads or any application relying on OpenCL acceleration. Its higher FP32 throughput (952.3 GFLOPS) and much larger memory bandwidth (96.00 GB/s) make it the stronger choice for data-intensive operations, even if the measured delta is smaller than theoretical peaks would imply. The GTX 580M also wins on fill rates, with a pixel rate of 9.920 GPixel/s and texture rate of 39.68 GTexel/s, which could benefit older games or applications that are geometry- or texture-bound.

The AMD Radeon R5 M435 has no recorded wins in this pairing, but it has advantages in other areas. Its 28 nm process and smaller die (56 mm² versus 332 mm²) mean it is far more power-efficient per unit of silicon area, though no TDP is listed for comparison. The R5 M435 supports Vulkan 1.2.170, which the GTX 580M lacks, so in Vulkan-based titles or workloads, the AMD part could potentially outperform despite its lower raw compute. The R5 M435 also has a boost clock of 1030 MHz, which may help it respond to bursty workloads. For users prioritizing modern API support or lower thermal footprint in an integrated package, the R5 M435 has a case, but the benchmark data does not show any performance win for it.

In terms of memory, the GTX 580M’s 256-bit bus is a decisive advantage for any task that saturates bandwidth. The R5 M435’s 64-bit bus is a severe limitation, even with a faster memory clock. The GTX 580M is therefore the preferred option for tasks like video processing, large matrix operations, or any workload that streams data through memory. The R5 M435 might be preferable for lightweight, portable devices where the IGP form factor and newer architecture are more relevant than raw performance.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the database measurements, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580M is the faster GPU. It wins the only head-to-head benchmark with a 9% lead in OpenCL, and it holds advantages in every core specification that affects raw performance: more shading units (384 versus 320), more TMUs (64 versus 20), more ROPs (32 versus 8), higher FP32 throughput (952.3 GFLOPS versus 659.2 GFLOPS), and greater memory bandwidth (96.00 GB/s versus 36.00 GB/s). The GTX 580M also has a higher pixel rate and texture rate, as well as a higher percentile ranking (37th versus 33rd).

The AMD Radeon R5 M435 is not a performance winner in this comparison, but it offers modern features that the GTX 580M cannot match. It supports Vulkan 1.2.170, has a newer architecture (GCN 1.0 versus Fermi 2.0), and is built on a more efficient 28 nm process. It also has a boost clock of 1030 MHz, which could allow it to adapt to dynamic workloads. However, the database records no benchmark where the R5 M435 outperforms the GTX 580M, so any recommendation for the AMD part must rest on feature support rather than measured speed.

For a user choosing between these two, the GTX 580M is the clear pick if the task is compute- or bandwidth-intensive and runs on OpenCL or older DirectX APIs. The R5 M435 is only advisable if Vulkan support or a smaller, more modern die is a priority, or if the device form factor demands an IGP rather than an MXM module. The data does not support any scenario where the R5 M435 wins on performance. The GTX 580M’s 9% lead in the sole benchmark, combined with its overwhelming theoretical advantages, makes it the definitive choice for anyone who values speed over architectural novelty.