AMD Radeon R6 M255DX vs AMD Radeon RX 560 Comparison

AMD Radeon R6 M255DX and AMD Radeon RX 560 represent two very different generations of AMD graphics, separated by three years and a fundamental shift in process technology and architecture. The R6 M255DX is a 2014 integrated solution built on the 28 nm GCN 1.0 architecture, while the RX 560 is a 2017 discrete card on the 14 nm GCN 4.0 architecture. The data available shows a stark contrast in performance, but also reveals that the RX 560's average benchmark score places it in a surprisingly modest percentile, prompting a closer look at what these numbers actually mean in context.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark table between the two cards is empty, meaning there are no direct comparative test results where both GPUs ran the exact same workload. This is common when comparing an integrated processor graphics solution against a discrete add-in board, as their test environments and driver paths diverge significantly. Instead, the comparison relies on their individual benchmark submissions and overall average scores.

The AMD Radeon R6 M255DX has a single benchmark entry: a Geekbench Vulkan score of 4867. This places it at the 28th percentile of all GPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals in that test are telling: it sits just 0.2% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560M (4855), 0.5% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce 940MX (4844), and 0.5% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GTS 450 (4893). The most striking comparison is against the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 8 GB, which scores 4901 — a margin of only 0.7%. This indicates that in the narrow Vulkan workload, the R6 M255DX performs in a range that spans nearly a decade of NVIDIA products, from a 2011 GTS 450 to a modern RTX 50-series card. That is a remarkable data point for an integrated GPU, suggesting the Vulkan test may be heavily driver- or geometry-bound rather than raw-throughput-bound.

The AMD Radeon RX 560, by contrast, has nine benchmark entries across multiple test suites. Its Geekbench Metal score is 18941, and its Geekbench OpenCL score is 16472. These are substantially higher than the R6 M255DX's Vulkan score, but direct cross-API comparisons are misleading because Vulkan, Metal, and OpenCL stress different parts of the hardware and software stack. In the Passmark suite, the RX 560 scores 3671 in G3D, 1437 in GPU Compute, and 485 in G2D. Its DirectX sub-scores are 57 for DirectX 9, 25 for DirectX 11, 21 for DirectX 12, and 16 for DirectX 10. The RX 560's average benchmark score is 4569, which is actually lower than the R6 M255DX's single Vulkan score of 4867. This is a critical nuance: the R6 M255DX's average is based on one test, while the RX 560's average is dragged down by its Passmark DirectX scores, which are in the tens or hundreds, not thousands.

The RX 560's nearest rivals further contextualize its position. It is 0.2% ahead of the AMD Radeon R5 M230 (4577), 0.2% behind the Intel HD Graphics P530 (4560), 1.1% behind the NVIDIA Quadro M3000M (4621), and 1.3% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M (4628). Its percentile rank is 26th, slightly below the R6 M255DX's 28th. This is counterintuitive at first glance — a discrete 2017 card with 1024 shading units ranking below a 2014 integrated part — but it becomes clearer when you consider that the RX 560's diverse benchmark portfolio includes many low-score DirectX tests that pull its average down, while the R6 M255DX only has one high Vulkan score.

Where Each One Wins

The R6 M255DX wins in the narrow category of Geekbench Vulkan performance, where its 4867 score outpaces the RX 560's average benchmark score of 4569 by roughly 6.5%. It also holds a higher percentile rank (28th vs. 26th), meaning it sits above a slightly larger fraction of all GPUs in the database. This suggests that for workloads specifically optimized for Vulkan on integrated hardware, the older GCN 1.0 architecture can still hold its own, likely due to lower overhead and fewer bottlenecks in that specific API path.

The RX 560 wins in almost every other measurable category. Its compute capabilities are dramatically higher: 2.611 TFLOPS FP32 versus 547.2 GFLOPS for the R6 M255DX — a 4.8x advantage. Its texture rate is 81.60 GTexel/s versus 17.10 GTexel/s, a 4.8x gap, and its pixel rate is 20.40 GPixel/s versus 6.840 GPixel/s, a 3x gap. The RX 560 also has dedicated 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus with 112.0 GB/s bandwidth, whereas the R6 M255DX relies on shared system memory with system-dependent bandwidth. In the Passmark G3D test, the RX 560 scores 3671, which is a meaningful indicator of real-world DirectX gaming performance, while the R6 M255DX has no comparable DirectX benchmark entry. The RX 560 also supports DirectX 12 (12_0), while the R6 M255DX only reaches DirectX 12 (11_1), meaning the newer card can handle more advanced DX12 features.

The Verdict

The data does not support a single winner across all metrics; it supports two different use cases. The AMD Radeon R6 M255DX is a system-integrated GPU from 2014, and its single Vulkan score of 4867 suggests it can handle lightweight or API-efficient workloads surprisingly well. However, that is the only data point available for it, and its lack of dedicated memory, 320 shading units, and 28 nm process node indicate it is not designed for sustained or demanding graphics tasks.

The AMD Radeon RX 560 is the clear choice for any workload that leverages compute, DirectX, or OpenCL. Its 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, 16 ROPs, and 4 GB of GDDR5 memory give it a massive structural advantage. Its Passmark G3D score of 3671, while not directly comparable to the R6 M255DX's Vulkan score, is a more reliable indicator of general-purpose gaming and graphics performance across a range of APIs. The RX 560's 75 W TDP and dual-slot form factor make it a discrete card that can be installed in a desktop, whereas the R6 M255DX is an IGP with portable-device-dependent outputs.

For a user who only cares about Vulkan-based applications on an older integrated platform, the R6 M255DX might suffice. For anyone else — gamers, compute users, or those needing modern API support — the RX 560 is the only rational choice, despite its lower average benchmark score. That lower average is an artifact of including many low-score DirectX tests, not a reflection of raw capability.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon R6 M255DX has an average benchmark score of 4867, while the AMD Radeon RX 560 has an average of 4569. The R6 M255DX's average is based on a single Geekbench Vulkan test, while the RX 560's average includes nine tests across multiple suites.

Q: How does the RX 560 compare to its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M?

A: The RX 560 is 1.3% behind the GTX 970M in average benchmark score, with the RX 560 scoring 4569 and the GTX 970M scoring 4628.

Q: Does the R6 M255DX support DirectX 12?

A: Yes, but only at feature level 11_1. The RX 560 supports DirectX 12 at feature level 12_0, which is a higher specification.

Q: What is the memory configuration of each card?

A: The R6 M255DX uses system shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth, while the RX 560 has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus with 112.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which card has a higher pixel fill rate?

A: The RX 560 has a pixel rate of 20.40 GPixel/s, which is exactly three times the R6 M255DX's pixel rate of 6.840 GPixel/s.

Q: What is the process node difference between the two?

A: The R6 M255DX is built on a 28 nm process at TSMC, while the RX 560 is built on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The RX 560 also has a higher transistor density at 24.4M / mm² versus 12.3M / mm².

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are built on fundamentally different architectures. The R6 M255DX uses the GCN 1.0 architecture on a chip codenamed Jet, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It packs 690 million transistors into a 56 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 12.3M per square millimeter. This is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with the bus interface listed as IGP, meaning it shares system memory and has no dedicated VRAM. Its shading units number 320, with 20 texture mapping units and 8 raster output units. The R6 M255DX supports DirectX 12 at feature level 11_1, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. Its FP32 compute is 547.2 GFLOPS, and it has no listed FP16 support.

The RX 560 is built on the GCN 4.0 architecture with a Polaris 21 chip, fabricated on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It contains 3,000 million transistors on a 123 mm² die, achieving a transistor density of 24.4M per square millimeter. This is a discrete dual-slot card with no power connectors and a suggested PSU of 250 W. It has 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. Its memory subsystem is entirely different: 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 112.0 GB/s bandwidth, versus the R6 M255DX's system-shared memory. The RX 560 supports DirectX 12 at feature level 12_0, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3 — a newer Vulkan version than the R6 M255DX's 1.2.170. Its FP32 compute is 2.611 TFLOPS, and it has FP16 at 2.611 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, which the R6 M255DX does not list at all.

The transistor count difference is stark: 3,000 million vs. 690 million, a 4.3x gap. The die size is larger on the RX 560 (123 mm² vs. 56 mm²), but the transistor density is also nearly double, reflecting the process node improvement from 28 nm to 14 nm. The RX 560's predecessor is listed as Arctic Islands and its successor as Vega, giving it a clear lineage in AMD's discrete GPU roadmap. The R6 M255DX has no predecessor or successor listed, and its generation is described as "Gem System Hybrid (Rx M200)," indicating it was part of a hybrid system solution.

Specification Differences

The specifications where the two cards differ are extensive. The process node is 28 nm for the R6 M255DX and 14 nm for the RX 560. The foundry is TSMC for the former and GlobalFoundries for the latter. Transistor count is 690 million vs. 3,000 million, and die size is 56 mm² vs. 123 mm². Transistor density is 12.3M / mm² vs. 24.4M / mm². The base clock is 780 MHz vs. 1175 MHz, and the boost clock is 855 MHz vs. 1275 MHz. Memory is system shared for the R6 M255DX, while the RX 560 has 4 GB GDDR5 with a 128-bit bus and 112.0 GB/s bandwidth. Shading units are 320 vs. 1024, TMUs are 20 vs. 64, and ROPs are 8 vs. 16. Pixel rate is 6.840 GPixel/s vs. 20.40 GPixel/s, and texture rate is 17.10 GTexel/s vs. 81.60 GTexel/s. FP32 is 547.2 GFLOPS vs. 2.611 TFLOPS, and FP16 is not listed for the R6 M255DX but is 2.611 TFLOPS (1:1) for the RX 560. TDP is not listed for the R6 M255DX but is 75 W for the RX 560. Slot width is IGP vs. dual-slot. Power connectors are absent for both, but the RX 560 lists a suggested PSU of 250 W. Bus interface is IGP vs. PCIe 3.0 x8. Display outputs are portable-device-dependent for the R6 M255DX, while the RX 560 has 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0b, and 1x DisplayPort 1.4a. DirectX support is 12 (11_1) vs. 12 (12_0), and Vulkan is 1.2.170 vs. 1.3. The RX 560 has a length of 170 mm (6.7 inches), while the R6 M255DX has no dimensions listed. Release dates are 2014-01-06 for the R6 M255DX and 2017-04-17 for the RX 560. The RX 560 has a launch MSRP of 99 USD; the R6 M255DX has no launch MSRP listed.