AMD Radeon R6 M255DX vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760M Comparison

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760M and AMD Radeon R6 M255DX are two end-of-life mobile graphics solutions from the 2013–2014 era, built on 28 nm TSMC processes but targeting very different segments. The GTX 760M is a discrete MXM module with dedicated GDDR5 memory, while the R6 M255DX is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) that relies on system-shared memory. Benchmark data shows the pair is far closer in synthetic performance than their architectural disparities would suggest, though the GTX 760M holds the edge in every recorded test.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only directly comparable benchmark between the two parts is Geekbench Vulkan, where the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760M scores 4,868 and the AMD Radeon R6 M255DX scores 4,867. The delta is a rounding error — effectively 0% — meaning that in this one synthetic workload, the two GPUs deliver statistically identical results. The GTX 760M is marked as the winner, but the data indicates a dead heat rather than a meaningful victory. This near-tie is remarkable given the hardware differences: the GTX 760M has 768 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 16 ROPs, while the R6 M255DX has 320 shading units, 20 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. The AMD part compensates with higher clocks — a base of 780 MHz and boost of 855 MHz versus the NVIDIA chip’s 628 MHz base and 719 MHz boost — but the NVIDIA part still pulls ahead, however marginally.

Looking at average benchmark scores across all recorded tests, the GTX 760M posts 5,236 versus the R6 M255DX’s 4,867. That is a 7.1% gap in favor of the NVIDIA part, which places it at the 31st percentile among all GPUs, compared to the AMD part’s 28th percentile. The GTX 760M’s Geekbench OpenCL score of 5,604 further widens the practical gap, as the R6 M255DX has no recorded OpenCL result in this dataset. For context, the GTX 760M’s nearest rivals are the NVIDIA Quadro 4000M (5,211 average, 0.5% behind), the NVIDIA GeForce 940M (5,284 average, 0.9% ahead), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M (5,308 average, 1.3% ahead). The R6 M255DX, meanwhile, sits within 0.7% of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 8 GB (4,901 average) and within 0.5% of the NVIDIA GeForce 940MX (4,844 average). These rival clusters suggest the GTX 760M competes in a slightly higher performance tier than the R6 M255DX, even though the head-to-head Vulkan result shows them neck-and-neck.

The GTX 760M wins 1 head-to-head benchmark (Geekbench Vulkan) and the R6 M255DX wins 0, but the margin is so slim that the win is functionally meaningless. In real-world terms, the data shows the AMD part is not a pushover — it trades blows with the GTX 760M on Vulkan performance — but the NVIDIA part’s broader benchmark coverage (including OpenCL) and higher average score make it the more consistent performer across the board.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in the Geekbench Vulkan benchmark?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760M scores 4,868 versus the AMD Radeon R6 M255DX’s 4,867, a difference of 0%. The GTX 760M is technically the winner, but the result is effectively a tie.

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in terms of average benchmark score?

A: The GTX 760M has an average benchmark score of 5,236, while the R6 M255DX averages 4,867. That puts the NVIDIA part roughly 7.1% ahead, and it ranks at the 31st percentile versus the AMD part’s 28th percentile.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon R6 M255DX have a Geekbench OpenCL score?

A: No, the dataset only includes a Geekbench Vulkan score of 4,867 for the R6 M255DX. The GTX 760M, by contrast, has both a Vulkan score (4,868) and an OpenCL score (5,604).

Q: What are the nearest rivals to the GTX 760M in terms of average score?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro 4000M (5,211, 0.5% behind), NVIDIA GeForce 940M (5,284, 0.9% ahead), NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M (5,308, 1.3% ahead), and AMD Radeon R7 M260X (5,161, 1.5% behind) are the closest matches.

Q: What are the nearest rivals to the R6 M255DX in terms of average score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560M (4,855, 0.2% behind), NVIDIA GeForce 940MX (4,844, 0.5% behind), NVIDIA GeForce GTS 450 (4,893, 0.5% ahead), and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 8 GB (4,901, 0.7% ahead) are the closest matches.

Q: Which GPU has a higher transistor density?

A: The AMD Radeon R6 M255DX has a transistor density of 12.3M / mm², while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760M has 11.5M / mm². The AMD chip is denser despite having far fewer total transistors (690 million versus 2,540 million) and a smaller die (56 mm² versus 221 mm²).

Architecture Differences

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760M is built on the Kepler architecture, specifically the GK106S chip, and belongs to the GeForce 700M generation. It uses a 28 nm process from TSMC and packs 2,540 million transistors into a 221 mm² die. The AMD Radeon R6 M255DX, by contrast, uses the GCN 1.0 architecture with the Jet chip, also on a 28 nm TSMC process, but with only 690 million transistors on a 56 mm² die. The transistor density difference is minor (11.5M / mm² for NVIDIA versus 12.3M / mm² for AMD), but the raw scale is vastly different — the NVIDIA chip has nearly four times the transistor count and a die roughly four times larger.

The GTX 760M is a discrete GPU configured as an MXM module with no power connectors and a 55 W TDP, while the R6 M255DX is an IGP with no listed TDP, integrated directly into the system. This form-factor difference drives many architectural choices: the GTX 760M has dedicated GDDR5 memory with a 128-bit bus and 64.13 GB/s bandwidth, whereas the R6 M255DX relies entirely on system-shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth. The NVIDIA part’s memory clock is 1002 MHz (4 Gbps effective), while the AMD part’s memory is simply listed as "System Shared."

In terms of compute resources, the GTX 760M features 768 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, compared to the R6 M255DX’s 320 shading units, 20 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. This translates to a pixel rate of 11.50 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 46.02 GTexel/s for the NVIDIA part, versus 6.840 GPixel/s and 17.10 GTexel/s for the AMD part. FP32 performance follows suit: 1,104.4 GFLOPS for the GTX 760M versus 547.2 GFLOPS for the R6 M255DX. The AMD part does clock higher (780 MHz base, 855 MHz boost versus 628 MHz base, 719 MHz boost), but the NVIDIA part’s wider execution resources more than compensate.

API support also differs. The GTX 760M supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175, while the R6 M255DX supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The AMD part has a slightly higher DirectX feature level, but the NVIDIA part has a slightly newer Vulkan version. Neither has ray tracing or tensor cores, and both use a PCIe 3.0 x16 interface — though the GTX 760M implements it as a bus interface while the R6 M255DX uses an IGP connection. The R6 M255DX belongs to the "Gem System Hybrid (Rx M200)" generation, indicating a hybrid system design, whereas the GTX 760M is a straightforward discrete part.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ on nearly every hardware specification. The GTX 760M has a 628 MHz base clock and 719 MHz boost clock, while the R6 M255DX runs at 780 MHz base and 855 MHz boost — the AMD part is clocked about 24% higher at base and 19% higher at boost. However, the NVIDIA part has 768 shading units versus 320, 64 TMUs versus 20, and 16 ROPs versus 8. Memory is a fundamental split: the GTX 760M has 2 GB of GDDR5 with a 128-bit bus and 64.13 GB/s bandwidth, while the R6 M255DX has system-shared memory with no fixed size, type, or bandwidth. The GTX 760M’s memory clock is 1002 MHz (4 Gbps effective); the R6 M255DX’s memory clock is "System Shared."

Pixel and texture rates reflect the resource disparity: 11.50 GPixel/s and 46.02 GTexel/s for the GTX 760M versus 6.840 GPixel/s and 17.10 GTexel/s for the R6 M255DX. FP32 throughput is 1,104.4 GFLOPS versus 547.2 GFLOPS. The GTX 760M has a TDP of 55 W and uses an MXM module slot, with no power connectors; the R6 M255DX has no TDP listed and is an IGP. Transistor count is 2,540 million on a 221 mm² die for NVIDIA versus 690 million on a 56 mm² die for AMD. The GTX 760M was released on 2013-05-29, while the R6 M255DX came later on 2014-01-06. The GTX 760M sits between the GeForce 600M (predecessor) and GeForce 800M (successor), while the R6 M255DX has no listed predecessor or successor.

DirectX support differs slightly: the GTX 760M supports 12 (11_0) and the R6 M255DX supports 12 (11_1). Vulkan support is 1.2.175 for NVIDIA versus 1.2.170 for AMD. Both support OpenGL 4.6. The bus interface is PCIe 3.0 x16 for the GTX 760M versus IGP for the R6 M255DX. Display outputs are "Portable Device Dependent" for both, and neither has a launch MSRP in the data.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear, if narrow, hierarchy: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760M outperforms the AMD Radeon R6 M255DX in average benchmark score (5,236 versus 4,867) and ranks higher at the 31st percentile versus 28th. The head-to-head Vulkan result is a tie, but the GTX 760M’s additional OpenCL score (5,604) and superior hardware resources make it the more capable part overall. The GTX 760M’s FP32 throughput is roughly double that of the R6 M255DX (1,104.4 GFLOPS versus 547.2 GFLOPS), and its texture and pixel rates are similarly doubled. Its dedicated 2 GB GDDR5 memory with 64.13 GB/s bandwidth is a major advantage over the R6 M255DX’s system-shared memory, which has system-dependent bandwidth.

Who should pick which? A user needing a discrete, self-contained GPU with dedicated memory and a defined 55 W TDP should choose the GTX 760M. It fits in an MXM module slot, has no external power connectors, and offers better overall synthetic performance with a wider benchmark footprint. The R6 M255DX, as an IGP with system-shared memory, is suited to systems where integration and lower transistor overhead matter — its 690-million-transistor die is a fraction of the GTX 760M’s 2,540-million-transistor design, and its higher base and boost clocks show AMD squeezed competitive Vulkan performance from a much smaller chip. However, its lack of an OpenCL score and lower average benchmark result mean it cannot match the GTX 760M in general-purpose compute or sustained performance.

For raw benchmark dominance, the GTX 760M wins on average score, percentile rank, and feature set. For a system that prioritizes integrated simplicity, the R6 M255DX is the only option of the two, but the data shows it gives up measurable performance to do so. The GTX 760M is the stronger GPU, and the numbers make that clear — even if the Vulkan head-to-head suggests the gap is narrower than the silicon differences imply.