AMD Radeon R6 M255DX vs NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon R6 M255DX and NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M occupy different corners of the mobile graphics landscape, and the recorded benchmark data shows a clear split in their strengths. The AMD part, built as an integrated graphics processor (IGP) for hybrid systems, posts a single Geekbench Vulkan score of 4867, while the NVIDIA discrete module counters with two scores: 3132 in Geekbench Metal and 4934 in Geekbench OpenCL. The AMD chip wins the overall average benchmark comparison, holding an average score of 4867 against NVIDIA's 4033, a difference of roughly 20.7%. However, the NVIDIA GPU wins on API-specific workloads where OpenCL is the test harness, edging ahead by 67 points (4934 vs. 4867, about 1.4% higher).

The practical takeaway: the Radeon R6 M255DX is the stronger choice for Vulkan-based applications, where it outperforms the GT 755M's OpenCL result by 1.4%, and its average score places it in the 28th percentile of all GPUs, compared to NVIDIA's 24th percentile. The GeForce GT 755M, by contrast, shows its best face in OpenCL compute tasks, and its Metal score of 3132, while lower than its own OpenCL figure, still indicates a functional API path for Apple-oriented workloads. In terms of raw throughput, the GT 755M offers higher pixel rate (8.160 GPixel/s vs. 6.840 GPixel/s), higher texture rate (32.64 GTexel/s vs. 17.10 GTexel/s), and higher FP32 compute (783.4 GFLOPS vs. 547.2 GFLOPS), yet the Radeon's Vulkan score suggests that API optimization can overcome some of that hardware deficit in specific tests.

Architecture Differences

The two chips come from different design philosophies. The AMD Radeon R6 M255DX uses the Jet chip with GCN 1.0 architecture, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It packs 690 million transistors into a 56 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 12.3 million per square millimeter. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M uses the GK107 chip with Kepler architecture, also on a 28 nm TSMC process, but with 1,270 million transistors on a larger 118 mm² die, resulting in a lower density of 10.8 million per square millimeter. The NVIDIA die is more than twice the size and carries nearly twice the transistor count.

Core configuration differs substantially. The Radeon has 320 shading units, 20 texture mapping units, and 8 raster output units. The GeForce counters with 384 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. These numbers explain the NVIDIA part's higher pixel and texture throughput. Clock speeds also favor NVIDIA: the GT 755M runs at a 980 MHz base and 1020 MHz boost, while the Radeon operates at 780 MHz base and 855 MHz boost. Memory is a fundamental divider: the Radeon uses system shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth, while the GeForce has dedicated 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 86.40 GB/s of bandwidth. The GT 755M also lists a 50 W TDP and uses an MXM Module slot, whereas the Radeon is an IGP with no separate power connectors and no TDP listed.

Both support DirectX 12, though the Radeon's version is 12 (11_1) and NVIDIA's is 12 (11_0). OpenGL support is identical at 4.6. Vulkan versions differ slightly: 1.2.170 for AMD, 1.2.175 for NVIDIA. The Radeon was released on 2014-01-06, while the GeForce came earlier on 2013-06-24. NVIDIA lists its predecessor as GeForce 600M and successor as GeForce 800M; AMD lists neither.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records no direct head-to-head benchmark tests between these two specific models, so the comparison relies on their individual benchmark entries. The single Vulkan score for the Radeon R6 M255DX is 4867. The GeForce GT 755M's OpenCL score is 4934, which is 67 points higher, a 1.4% advantage. The Radeon's Vulkan result beats the GeForce's Metal score of 3132 by a wide margin, 1735 points, or about 55.4% higher. However, Metal is a different API than Vulkan, so that comparison is less meaningful for direct performance parity.

Looking at the Radeon's nearest rivals in the database, the GT 755M is not listed among them. Instead, the Radeon sits within 1% of several NVIDIA parts: the GeForce GTX 560M (4855, delta 0.2%), GeForce 940MX (4844, delta 0.5%), and GTS 450 (4893, delta -0.5%). It also matches the RTX 5060 Ti 8 GB (4901, delta -0.7%), which is an outlier showing how Vulkan scores can flatten generational gaps. The GeForce GT 755M's nearest rivals include the AMD FirePro M4150 (4013, delta 0.5%), Intel HD Graphics 630 (4075, delta -1%), AMD Radeon HD 6850 X2 (3977, delta 1.4%), and AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT 8 GB (4093, delta -1.5%). This places the GT 755M in a lower performance tier overall, with its average score of 4033 sitting roughly 17% below the Radeon's average of 4867.

The data shows that, despite the NVIDIA part having higher hardware specifications (more shading units, faster clocks, dedicated memory), the AMD part's Vulkan implementation delivers a better average result. The GT 755M's 32.64 GTexel/s texture rate and 8.160 GPixel/s pixel rate are roughly 91% and 19% higher than the Radeon's respective rates, yet those advantages do not translate into a higher average benchmark score. This suggests that the Radeon's architecture and driver optimizations for Vulkan are more effective in the recorded test, or that the system shared memory configuration benefits from the host platform's memory bandwidth in ways the dedicated GDDR5 does not match in this specific workload.

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 NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M averages 4033. The Radeon leads by about 20.7%.

Q: What is the best single benchmark result for each GPU?

A: The Radeon's best (and only) recorded result is 4867 in Geekbench Vulkan. The GeForce's best is 4934 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 67 points higher than the Radeon's Vulkan score.

Q: How do the memory configurations differ?

A: The Radeon R6 M255DX uses system shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth and no dedicated video memory. The GeForce GT 755M has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 86.40 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M has 384 shading units, compared to 320 for the AMD Radeon R6 M255DX. The GeForce also has more TMUs (32 vs. 20) and ROPs (16 vs. 8).

Q: Do both GPUs support DirectX 12?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12, but with different feature levels: the Radeon supports 12 (11_1) while the GeForce supports 12 (11_0). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan, with the GeForce having a slightly newer Vulkan version (1.2.175 vs. 1.2.170).

Q: What are the nearest rivals for each GPU in the database?

A: For the Radeon R6 M255DX, the nearest rivals are the GeForce GTX 560M (4855, delta 0.2%), GeForce 940MX (4844, delta 0.5%), GTS 450 (4893, delta -0.5%), and RTX 5060 Ti 8 GB (4901, delta -0.7%). For the GeForce GT 755M, they are the FirePro M4150 (4013, delta 0.5%), Intel HD Graphics 630 (4075, delta -1%), Radeon HD 6850 X2 (3977, delta 1.4%), and Radeon RX 9060 XT 8 GB (4093, delta -1.5%).

The Verdict

The benchmark data makes a straightforward recommendation for different use cases. For anyone prioritizing Vulkan-based gaming or compute, the AMD Radeon R6 M255DX is the better option. Its 4867 Vulkan score places it in the 28th percentile of all GPUs, and its average score sits above the GeForce GT 755M's by a clear margin. The Radeon's nearest rivals include the GeForce GTX 560M and 940MX, both of which it essentially matches, suggesting that its integrated design does not hold it back in Vulkan workloads.

For OpenCL-heavy tasks, the NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M is the stronger pick. Its 4934 OpenCL score is the highest individual result between the two, and it outperforms the Radeon's Vulkan score by 1.4%. However, the GT 755M's Metal score of 3132 is far lower, and its average score of 4033 places it in the 24th percentile, below the Radeon's 28th. The GeForce also offers the hardware advantage of dedicated GDDR5 memory, a 50 W TDP, and a PCIe 3.0 x16 interface, which may matter for systems that can use discrete modules.

The verdict depends on the workload. The Radeon wins on average performance and Vulkan efficiency. The GeForce wins on raw hardware throughput (higher pixel rate, texture rate, FP32) and OpenCL compute. Users with OpenCL-specific applications should choose the GT 755M; users who need general mobile graphics with the best recorded average score should choose the Radeon R6 M255DX. The data does not support a single universal winner, but for a balanced view, the Radeon's higher percentile and average score give it the edge in most mixed-use scenarios.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon R6 M255DX | NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M |

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

| Manufacturer | AMD | NVIDIA |

| Chip | Jet | GK107 |

| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Kepler |

| Generation | Gem System Hybrid (Rx M200) | GeForce 700M |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | TSMC |

| Transistors | 690 million | 1,270 million |

| Die Size | 56 mm² | 118 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 12.3M / mm² | 10.8M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 780 MHz | 980 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 855 MHz | 1020 MHz |

| Memory Size | System Shared | 2 GB |

| Memory Type | System Shared | GDDR5 |

| Memory Bus Width | System Shared | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | System Dependent | 86.40 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 320 | 384 |

| TMUs | 20 | 32 |

| ROPs | 8 | 16 |

| Pixel Rate | 6.840 GPixel/s | 8.160 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 17.10 GTexel/s | 32.64 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 547.2 GFLOPS | 783.4 GFLOPS |

| TDP | Not listed | 50 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | MXM Module |

| Power Connectors | None | None |

| Bus Interface | IGP | PCIe 3.0 x16 |

| DirectX | 12 (11_1) | 12 (11_0) |

| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |

| Vulkan | 1.2.170 | 1.2.175 |

| Release Date | 2014-01-06 | 2013-06-24 |

| Predecessor | Not listed | GeForce 600M |

| Successor | Not listed | GeForce 800M |

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