AMD Radeon R5 M435 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760M Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which GPU scores higher in the OpenCL benchmark, and by how much?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M435 scores 5859 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760M scores 5604. The AMD part leads by 4.6% in this specific test.

Q: How do these two GPUs compare to their nearest rivals?

A: The R5 M435 sits within 1.6% of three rivals: it is 0.3% ahead of the AMD Radeon R7 M465, 1.2% behind the Intel UHD Graphics 730, and 1.6% behind both the AMD Radeon HD 8730M and NVIDIA Quadro K620M. The GTX 760M is within 1.5% of four rivals: 0.5% ahead of the NVIDIA Quadro 4000M, 0.9% behind the NVIDIA GeForce 940M, 1.3% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M, and 1.5% ahead of the AMD Radeon R7 M260X.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each GPU?

A: The R5 M435 has an average benchmark score of 5859, based on its single OpenCL result. The GTX 760M averages 5236 across two results: 5604 in OpenCL and 4868 in Vulkan.

Q: Which GPU has a higher overall percentile ranking?

A: The R5 M435 ranks in the 33rd percentile among all GPUs, while the GTX 760M ranks in the 31st percentile. The AMD part holds a slight edge in overall standing.

Q: What are the process node and transistor counts for each chip?

A: Both GPUs use a 28 nm process at TSMC. The R5 M435 packs 690 million transistors on a 56 mm² die, while the GTX 760M contains 2,540 million transistors on a 221 mm² die.

Q: Which GPU supports a higher DirectX version?

A: The R5 M435 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), while the GTX 760M supports DirectX 12 (11_0). Both support OpenGL 4.6, and the GTX 760M has a slightly newer Vulkan version at 1.2.175 versus 1.2.170.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon R5 M435 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760M represent fundamentally different architectural approaches from their respective manufacturers. The R5 M435 is built on AMD's GCN 1.0 architecture with the "Jet" chip, part of the Gem System generation within the R5 M400 family. The GTX 760M uses NVIDIA's Kepler architecture with the GK106S chip, belonging to the GeForce 700M generation.

The transistor counts reveal a dramatic scale difference. The GTX 760M's GK106S contains 2,540 million transistors on a 221 mm² die, which is roughly 3.7 times the transistor count of the R5 M435's 690 million transistors on a 56 mm² die. Despite this, the transistor density is surprisingly similar: 12.3 million transistors per mm² for the AMD chip versus 11.5 million for the NVIDIA chip. Both are fabricated on the same 28 nm process at TSMC.

The execution resources differ substantially in count but not in straightforward proportion. The GTX 760M has 768 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 16 ROPs. The R5 M435 has 320 shading units, 20 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. This gives the NVIDIA part 2.4 times the shading units, 3.2 times the TMUs, and 2 times the ROPs. However, clock speeds tell a different story: the R5 M435 runs at a base of 780 MHz with a boost of 1030 MHz, while the GTX 760M runs at 628 MHz base and 719 MHz boost. The AMD part's higher clocks partially offset its resource disadvantage.

Memory architectures also diverge. Both use 2 GB of GDDR5, but the GTX 760M has a 128-bit bus delivering 64.13 GB/s of bandwidth, while the R5 M435 has a 64-bit bus delivering 36.00 GB/s. The NVIDIA part offers nearly double the memory bandwidth. The R5 M435's memory runs at 1125 MHz (4.5 Gbps effective) versus the GTX 760M's 1002 MHz (4 Gbps effective), but the wider bus wins decisively.

The bus interface differs as well: the R5 M435 uses PCIe 3.0 x8, while the GTX 760M uses PCIe 3.0 x16. The NVIDIA card is an MXM module with a 55 W TDP and no power connectors, while the R5 M435 is an integrated GPU (IGP) with no listed TDP. Both are end-of-life products, with the R5 M435 released in May 2016 and the GTX 760M released in May 2013.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison in the database is Geekbench OpenCL, where the AMD Radeon R5 M435 wins with a score of 5859 against the GTX 760M's 5604. The margin is 4.6%, a meaningful but not overwhelming lead. This result is somewhat counterintuitive given the NVIDIA part's larger transistor count, wider memory bus, and higher shading unit count.

The data suggests that the R5 M435's higher clock speeds and newer architectural generation contribute to its OpenCL advantage. The AMD part boosts to 1030 MHz versus 719 MHz for the NVIDIA part, a 43% higher boost clock. In workloads that scale with clock frequency rather than raw resource counts, the R5 M435 can overcome its resource deficit.

The GTX 760M has an additional benchmark result in Geekbench Vulkan, scoring 4868. However, there is no corresponding Vulkan score for the R5 M435, so a direct comparison in that API is not possible. The Vulkan score is notably lower than the OpenCL score for the same GPU, which may indicate that Kepler's Vulkan implementation is less efficient than its OpenCL path, or that the specific workload favors OpenCL.

When considering the average benchmark scores, the R5 M435's single OpenCL result of 5859 gives it an average of 5859. The GTX 760M averages 5236 across its two results, dragged down by the lower Vulkan score. This average differential of 623 points (roughly 11.9%) is larger than the raw OpenCL margin, but the comparison is complicated by the missing Vulkan data for the AMD part.

The wins tally shows 1 win for the R5 M435 and 0 for the GTX 760M in head-to-head tests, but this reflects only the single shared benchmark. The percentile rankings reinforce the AMD advantage: 33rd versus 31st, respectively.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every measurable specification:

• Chip: Jet (AMD) versus GK106S (NVIDIA)
• Architecture: GCN 1.0 versus Kepler
• Generation: Gem System (R5 M400) versus GeForce 700M
• Transistors: 690 million versus 2,540 million
• Die size: 56 mm² versus 221 mm²
• Transistor density: 12.3M / mm² versus 11.5M / mm²
• Base clock: 780 MHz versus 628 MHz
• Boost clock: 1030 MHz versus 719 MHz
• Memory clock: 1125 MHz (4.5 Gbps effective) versus 1002 MHz (4 Gbps effective)
• Memory bus width: 64 bit versus 128 bit
• Memory bandwidth: 36.00 GB/s versus 64.13 GB/s
• Shading units: 320 versus 768
• TMUs: 20 versus 64
• ROPs: 8 versus 16
• Pixel rate: 8.240 GPixel/s versus 11.50 GPixel/s
• Texture rate: 20.60 GTexel/s versus 46.02 GTexel/s
• FP32 performance: 659.2 GFLOPS versus 1,104.4 GFLOPS
• TDP: Not listed versus 55 W
• Slot width: IGP versus MXM Module
• Power connectors: None listed versus None
• Bus interface: PCIe 3.0 x8 versus PCIe 3.0 x16
• DirectX support: 12 (11_1) versus 12 (11_0)
• Vulkan support: 1.2.170 versus 1.2.175
• Release date: May 2016 versus May 2013
• Predecessor: Solar System versus GeForce 600M
• Successor: Polaris Mobile versus GeForce 800M

Notably, both GPUs share the same memory size (2 GB), memory type (GDDR5), and OpenGL support (4.6). Neither has ray tracing or tensor cores.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon R5 M435 wins in the OpenCL benchmark, the overall percentile ranking, and clock speeds. Its 1030 MHz boost clock gives it an advantage in latency-sensitive or lightly threaded workloads where raw frequency matters. The newer release date (May 2016 versus May 2013) means it benefits from three additional years of architectural refinement within the GCN lineage. The higher DirectX version (12 with 11_1 features versus 11_0) could translate to better feature support in modern titles that leverage those capabilities.

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760M wins in raw compute resources and throughput metrics. Its FP32 performance of 1,104.4 GFLOPS is 67.5% higher than the R5 M435's 659.2 GFLOPS. The texture rate of 46.02 GTexel/s is more than double the AMD part's 20.60 GTexel/s, and the pixel rate of 11.50 GPixel/s exceeds the AMD part's 8.240 GPixel/s by 39.5%. The memory bandwidth of 64.13 GB/s versus 36.00 GB/s gives it a substantial edge in bandwidth-bound scenarios such as high-resolution textures or large data sets.

The GTX 760M also has a major advantage in transistor count (2,540 million versus 690 million) and die area (221 mm² versus 56 mm²), indicating a fundamentally larger and more complex processor. Its 55 W TDP, while not listed for the AMD part, suggests it is designed as a discrete mobile solution, whereas the R5 M435's IGP classification implies it is integrated into a system.

For workloads that are heavily parallel and resource-saturated, the GTX 760M's data suggests it should excel. For workloads that are clock-bound or that benefit from newer API features, the R5 M435 appears better positioned. The OpenCL result, however, shows the AMD part winning despite the NVIDIA part's theoretical advantages, which suggests that real-world performance does not always follow raw specifications.

The Verdict

The benchmark data indicates that the AMD Radeon R5 M435 is the better choice for OpenCL-based workloads, with a 4.6% lead over the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760M in the head-to-head test and a higher percentile ranking (33rd versus 31st). Its higher clock speeds and newer architecture appear to deliver tangible benefits in the measured workload.

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760M, however, presents a compelling case for scenarios that demand maximum throughput. Its FP32 performance, texture rate, pixel rate, and memory bandwidth are all substantially higher than the AMD part's, and its Vulkan support is slightly newer. The data shows the GTX 760M as the superior hardware on paper, yet the OpenCL benchmark contradicts that expectation.

For users prioritizing the measured OpenCL performance and percentile standing, the R5 M435 is the data-supported pick. For users who anticipate workloads that leverage the NVIDIA part's higher theoretical throughput, memory bandwidth, or Vulkan capabilities, the GTX 760M remains viable. The absence of a Vulkan score for the R5 M435 leaves a gap in the comparison, but based strictly on available data, the AMD Radeon R5 M435 edges out the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760M in the only directly comparable test.