AMD Radeon R7 Graphics vs AMD Radeon R7 M340 Comparison

# AMD Radeon R7 M340 vs AMD Radeon R7 Graphics

The AMD Radeon R7 M340 and AMD Radeon R7 Graphics are two end-of-life mobile graphics solutions that land within 1.3% of each other in average benchmark score, making them effectively peers in overall performance. The M340 is a discrete part (Meso chip, GCN 3.0, 28 nm TSMC) that averages 5063 across its benchmark runs, while the R7 Graphics is an integrated GPU (Spectre Lite chip, GCN 2.0, 28 nm GlobalFoundries) averaging 4998. Despite the near-identical averages, the two split their head-to-head results exactly one win each: the M340 takes Geekbench OpenCL by 22.8%, and the R7 Graphics takes Geekbench Vulkan by 13.2%. The M340 ranks at the 30th percentile of all GPUs, the R7 Graphics at the 29th. For a builder choosing between these, the decision comes down to workload type: OpenCL-oriented tasks favor the discrete card, while Vulkan-based applications favor the integrated part. Neither offers a commanding lead, and both sit in the lower third of GPU performance overall.

The Verdict

Pick the AMD Radeon R7 M340 if your primary workloads rely on OpenCL compute. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 4932 beats the R7 Graphics' 4015 by 22.8%, a substantial margin for a single test. The M340 also has dedicated 2 GB DDR3 memory on a 64-bit bus (16.00 GB/s bandwidth), which means it does not contend with system RAM for memory access. This card matches the AMD Radeon R7 240 exactly in average score (5063 vs 5063, 0% delta) and sits 0.6% above the FirePro W4170M. It is a discrete PCIe 3.0 x8 solution, so it can be paired with any compatible system without relying on integrated graphics.

Pick the AMD Radeon R7 Graphics if your work or play leans on Vulkan. Its Geekbench Vulkan score of 5980 beats the M340's 5193 by 13.2%, the single largest win in this comparison. The R7 Graphics also benefits from 384 shading units and 24 TMUs—more than the M340's 320 and 20—which likely contributes to its Vulkan advantage. It has a 25 W TDP and is an IGP, meaning it draws from shared system memory (bandwidth is system dependent). This part sits 0.4% above the NVIDIA Quadro 4000 in average score and 0.6% above the GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB, though those deltas are within noise.

Avoid picking either for high-end gaming or compute. Both GPUs sit below the 30th percentile of all GPUs, and their average scores (5063 and 4998) are separated by just 1.3%. The M340's nearest rival list includes the R7 240 at an identical score, while the R7 Graphics' list includes the Quadro 4000 at a 0.4% gap—neither list shows a dominant position. The data indicates these are entry-level parts suited to light 1080p gaming or basic compute, not demanding tasks.

Where Each One Wins

The M340 wins decisively in OpenCL compute. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 4932 is 22.8% higher than the R7 Graphics' 4015. This suggests the M340's dedicated memory and higher clock rates (base 943 MHz, boost 1021 MHz) give it a real advantage in parallel compute workloads that use OpenCL—think scientific calculations, video encoding, or any application leveraging GPU compute. The M340 also has a higher pixel rate (8.168 GPixel/s vs 5.760 GPixel/s) and texture rate (20.42 GTexel/s vs 17.28 GTexel/s), which indicates better raw throughput for fill-rate-bound tasks. Its FP32 performance of 653.4 GFLOPS exceeds the R7 Graphics' 553.0 GFLOPS by 18.2%, reinforcing the compute edge.

The R7 Graphics wins in Vulkan. Its Geekbench Vulkan score of 5980 is 13.2% higher than the M340's 5193. This is the only benchmark where the integrated part leads, but it's a significant one. Vulkan is a low-overhead API that benefits from shader count and memory latency characteristics, and the R7 Graphics' 384 shading units (20% more than the M340's 320) likely explain the advantage. The R7 Graphics also has a lower TDP (25 W vs the M340's unspecified, but the IGP's power draw is inherently lower as it shares system resources), making it a more power-efficient choice for Vulkan-based workloads. Its texture rate of 17.28 GTexel/s is lower than the M340's, but the Vulkan score suggests the extra shaders matter more in that API.

In terms of average performance, the two are effectively tied. The M340's 5063 average is just 1.3% above the R7 Graphics' 4998, and each card's nearest rival list includes the other—the M340 lists the R7 Graphics at a 1.3% delta, and the R7 Graphics lists the M340 implicitly through the R5 M430 and FirePro W4170M at -0.4% and -0.7% respectively. Neither part has a workload-independent advantage.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different GCN generations and different foundries. The M340 uses the Meso chip built on GCN 3.0, fabricated by TSMC on a 28 nm process. It packs 1,550 million transistors on a 125 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 12.4M / mm². The R7 Graphics uses the Spectre Lite chip on GCN 2.0, fabricated by GlobalFoundries on the same 28 nm node. It holds 2,410 million transistors on a 245 mm² die, for a lower density of 9.8M / mm². The R7 Graphics' larger die and higher transistor count reflect that it is an integrated part sharing the CPU die (the Kaveri generation), not a standalone GPU.

The compute resources differ meaningfully. The M340 has 320 shading units, 20 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. The R7 Graphics has 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and also 8 ROPs. The integrated part has 20% more shaders and TMUs, which explains its Vulkan advantage. However, the M340 compensates with higher clocks: 943 MHz base and 1021 MHz boost, versus the R7 Graphics' clocks being listed as null (system-dependent in an IGP). The M340's FP32 output is 653.4 GFLOPS versus 553.0 GFLOPS for the R7 Graphics, a 18.2% advantage that shows in OpenCL.

Memory architecture is fundamentally different. The M340 has 2 GB of dedicated DDR3 on a 64-bit bus with 16.00 GB/s bandwidth and 1000 MHz (2 Gbps effective) memory clock. The R7 Graphics uses System Shared memory—size, type, bus width, and bandwidth are all system dependent. This means the M340 has predictable memory performance, while the R7 Graphics' memory throughput depends entirely on the host system's RAM and configuration. Both support DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170, so API support is identical.

The M340 is a discrete card with a PCIe 3.0 x8 bus interface, while the R7 Graphics is an IGP with a 25 W TDP and "IGP" as its bus interface. The R7 Graphics' display outputs are motherboard dependent, whereas the M340's display outputs are not specified in the data. The R7 Graphics also has a formal TDP of 25 W, while the M340's TDP is not listed—likely higher given its discrete nature. The M340 belongs to the Gem System (R7 M300) generation, while the R7 Graphics is from the GCN 2.0 IGP (Kaveri) generation.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 M340 averages 5063, which is 1.3% above the AMD Radeon R7 Graphics' 4998. Both are within the same performance tier, and the deltas to their nearest rivals (0% to the R7 240 for the M340, 0.4% to the Quadro 4000 for the R7 Graphics) confirm they are closely matched.

Q: Which GPU is better for Vulkan workloads?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 Graphics wins Geekbench Vulkan with a score of 5980, beating the M340's 5193 by 13.2%. This is likely due to its higher shader count of 384 versus 320, despite the M340's higher clock speeds.

Q: Which GPU is better for OpenCL compute?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 M340 is significantly better in OpenCL, scoring 4932 versus the R7 Graphics' 4015—a 22.8% advantage. The M340's dedicated 2 GB DDR3 memory and higher FP32 throughput (653.4 GFLOPS vs 553.0 GFLOPS) contribute to this lead.

Q: Do these GPUs support the same APIs?

A: Yes. Both support DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. There is no difference in API support between the two.

Q: How do these compare to their nearest rivals?

A: The M340 matches the AMD Radeon R7 240 exactly (5063 vs 5063, 0% delta) and is 0.6% above the FirePro W4170M. The R7 Graphics is 0.4% above the NVIDIA Quadro 4000 and 0.6% above the GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB, though these deltas are within measurement noise.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units and TMUs?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 Graphics has 384 shading units and 24 TMUs, compared to the M340's 320 shading units and 20 TMUs. This gives the integrated part a 20% advantage in shader count and TMU count, which likely explains its Vulkan win.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two GPUs split their two head-to-head benchmark results exactly evenly, with each winning one test. The AMD Radeon R7 M340 wins Geekbench OpenCL with a score of 4932 versus the R7 Graphics' 4015, a delta of 22.8% in favor of the M340. This is the larger margin of the two tests. The M340's advantage here comes from its dedicated memory subsystem—2 GB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus with 16.00 GB/s bandwidth—which avoids the system-memory contention that an IGP must endure. Its base clock of 943 MHz and boost clock of 1021 MHz also provide consistent throughput, whereas the R7 Graphics has no listed base or boost clock, meaning its performance scales with the host system's thermal and power headroom. The FP32 numbers tell the same story: 653.4 GFLOPS for the M340 versus 553.0 GFLOPS for the R7 Graphics, a difference that directly impacts OpenCL compute tasks.

The AMD Radeon R7 Graphics wins Geekbench Vulkan with a score of 5980 versus the M340's 5193, a delta of 13.2% in favor of the R7 Graphics. This is the second-largest margin in the comparison, and it flips the script from OpenCL. The R7 Graphics achieves this despite having no dedicated memory and relying on system-shared RAM. Its 384 shading units—20% more than the M340's 320—provide the parallelism that Vulkan can exploit, and its 24 TMUs (versus 20) help with texture-heavy workloads. The R7 Graphics' pixel rate of 5.760 GPixel/s is lower than the M340's 8.168 GPixel/s, and its texture rate of 17.28 GTexel/s trails the M340's 20.42 GTexel/s, but the Vulkan score shows that raw fill rates are not the limiting factor in that API.

Looking at the broader benchmark context, the two GPUs' average scores (5063 for the M340, 4998 for the R7 Graphics) are separated by only 1.3%, and each appears in the other's nearest rival list. The M340's nearest rival, the AMD Radeon R7 240, matches its score exactly at 5063, with a 0% delta. The R7 Graphics' nearest rival, the NVIDIA Quadro 4000, trails by 0.4% at 4979. These deltas confirm that neither GPU has a meaningful overall performance advantage. The M340's 22.8% OpenCL win is offset by the R7 Graphics' 13.2% Vulkan win, and the remaining tests (if any existed) would likely fall in between. In practical terms, a user running OpenCL-heavy applications should expect roughly a quarter faster performance on the M340, while a user running Vulkan-heavy applications should expect roughly an eighth faster performance on the R7 Graphics. Both GPUs sit below the 30th percentile of all GPUs, so neither is suited for demanding workloads.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon R7 M340 | AMD Radeon R7 Graphics |

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

| Chip | Meso | Spectre Lite |

| Architecture | GCN 3.0 | GCN 2.0 |

| Generation | Gem System (R7 M300) | GCN 2.0 IGP (Kaveri) |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | GlobalFoundries |

| Transistors | 1,550 million | 2,410 million |

| Die Size | 125 mm² | 245 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 12.4M / mm² | 9.8M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 943 MHz | null |

| Boost Clock | 1021 MHz | null |

| Memory Clock | 1000 MHz (2 Gbps effective) | System Shared |

| Memory Size | 2 GB | System Shared |

| Memory Type | DDR3 | System Shared |

| Memory Bus Width | 64 bit | System Shared |

| Memory Bandwidth | 16.00 GB/s | System Dependent |

| Shading Units | 320 | 384 |

| TMUs | 20 | 24 |

| ROPs | 8 | 8 |

| Pixel Rate | 8.168 GPixel/s | 5.760 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 20.42 GTexel/s | 17.28 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 653.4 GFLOPS | 553.0 GFLOPS |

| FP16 | 653.4 GFLOPS (1:1) | null |

| TDP | null | 25 W |

| Slot Width | null | IGP |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | IGP |

| Display Outputs | null | Motherboard Dependent |

| Release Date | 2015-05-04 | 2014-02-16 |

| Predecessor | Solar System | TeraScale 3 IGP |

| Successor | Polaris Mobile | GCN 3.0 IGP |