AMD Radeon R7 Graphics vs AMD Radeon R7 M465 Comparison

# AMD Radeon R7 M465 vs AMD Radeon R7 Graphics

The Radeon R7 M465 and Radeon R7 Graphics are two very different products that happen to share the same family name. The M465 is a discrete mobile GPU, while the R7 Graphics is an integrated processor built into the Kaveri APU. The database shows a clear split in their performance profiles. The discrete part wins the only head-to-head benchmark by a wide margin. But the integrated part has its own set of advantages that matter for certain builds.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database includes a direct comparison using Geekbench OpenCL. The R7 M465 scored 5841 points, while the Radeon R7 Graphics scored 4015 points. That is a 45.5% lead for the discrete solution. This is the largest gap in the recorded comparison set, a decisive victory for the M465 in raw compute workloads.

The nearest rivals in the database show how the M465 sits in the broader mobile GPU market. The AMD Radeon R5 M435 scores 5859, which is 0.3% above the M465. The Intel UHD Graphics 730 scores 5929, 1.5% above the M465. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 550 Ti scores 5731, which is 1.9% below the M465. Finally, the AMD Radeon HD 8730M scores 5955, which is 1.9% above the M465. These are all close scores, meaning the M465 is a mid-pack performer.

The Radeon R7 Graphics, in turn, is compared to a different set of rivals. The NVIDIA Quadro 4000 scores 4979, which is 0.4% above the R7 Graphics. The AMD Radeon R5 M430 scores 5018, which is 0.4% below. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB scores 4970, which is 0.6% behind. The AMD FirePro W4170M scores 5034, which is 0.7% above the integrated part. The average benchmark score for the R7 Graphics is 4998, placing it at the 29th percentile of all GPUs in the database.

What is important here is what these numbers mean for real use. A 45.5% lead in OpenCL compute means the M465 will handle tasks that offload compute to the GPU much faster. The integrated R7 Graphics is not a compute monster, but it is in the same general league as older discrete parts. The recorded data suggests the M465 is the pick for any workload that is GPU compute heavy, while the R7 Graphics is fine for basic media acceleration.

Architecture Differences

The M465 is built on the GCN 3.0 architecture, with the code name "Topaz". It is a discrete chip with 384 shading units, 24 texture mapping units, and 8 raster operations pipelines. Its transistor count is 1,550 million on a 125 square millimeter die, produced on a 28 nm TSMC process. The transistor density is 12.4 million per square millimeter. It uses a PCIe 3.0 x8 bus interface. The GPU works with 2 GB GDDR5 memory on a 64-bit bus, providing 36.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The memory clock is 1125 MHz, and the effective data rate is 4.5 Gbps.

The R7 Graphics, on the other hand, is from the GCN 2.0 "Kaveri" generation, with the "Spectre Lite" chip. It is a 28nm GlobalFoundries chip with 2,410 million transistors on a 245 square millimeter die, a density of 9.8M per square millimeter. The R7 Graphics uses system shared memory. It has 384 shading units and 24 texture units, both are lower counts than the discrete part. The pixel rate is 5.760 GPixel/s and the texture fill rate is 17.28 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 553.0 GFLOPS. The R7's TDP is 25 W.

The architecture is the big difference. Discrete is a separate chip with dedicated video memory and a dedicated bus. Integrated shares system memory and its performance depends on the CPU's memory controller. For compute workloads, the dedicated GDDR5 and bandwidth of the M465 give it a clear advantage.

FAQ

Q: Which is faster in the database, the M465 or the R7 Graphics?

The M465 is faster. In the only head-to-head OpenCL test, it scored 5841 against 4015, a 45.5% lead.

Q: Does the R7 Graphics share memory with the system?

Yes, the R7 Graphics uses System Shared memory. The M465 uses its own 2 GB GDDR5.

Q: What is the difference in the architecture?

The M465 is a discrete GCN 3.0 (Topaz) chip. The R7 Graphics is a GCN 2.0 (Kaveri) integrated solution with a "Spectre Lite" chip.

Q: Which is better for a thin and light laptop?

The R7 Graphics is an integrated solution with a 25W TDP, which is more suited for a thin and light design. The M465 is a separate chip with a higher power draw.

Q: Does the R7 Graphics support DX12?

Yes, it support DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170.

Specification Differences

The two parts differ in nearly every major specification except for some basic values. The M465 has a dedicated, listed core clock of 730 MHz and a boost of 1024 MHz. The R7 Graphics does not list base or boost clocks, since it is a shared solution.

The R7 has 384 shading units and 24 texture units, which are lower than the discrete M465's 384 and 24. The ROP count is the same at 8. The M465 has 24 TMUs, the R7 has 24. The R7's pixel rate is 5.760 GPixel/s, and its texture rate is 17.28 GTexel/s, both lower than the M465's 8.192 GPixel/s and 24.58 GTexel/s.

The R7 has 384 shading units, the M465 has 384. The R7 has a 64-bit memory bus, while the M465's memory bus is also 64-bit. The M465 uses 2 GB, the R7 is system shared.

The M465 uses a 64-bit GDDR5 memory, the R7 uses the system shared memory. The M465's memory clock is 1125 MHz, the R7's memory clock is "System Shared" (no dedicated clock).

The API support is the same for both: DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170 on the M465. The R7 lists DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170.

The M465's production status is End-of-life. The R7 Graphics is End-of-life. The M465 was released on 2016-05-14. The R7 was released on 2014-02-16. The M465's predecessor is the Solar System, and its successor is the Polaris Mobile. The R7's predecessor is the TeraScale 3 IGP, and its successor is the GCN 3.0 IGP.

Where Each One Wins

The M465 wins on raw compute: The 45.5% lead in the head-to-head benchmark is the single largest gap in the data. Any workload that uses OpenCL compute will be much faster on this discrete part.

The R7 wins on power and integration: The R7 Graphics has a 25W TDP, making it a natural fit for ultra-thin and light notebooks where power and heat are a premium. By sharing system memory, it also simplifies the build and reduces cost in some designs.

The M465 wins on bandwidth: 36.00 GB/s of dedicated GDDR5 memory bandwidth is far more than any shared system solution can offer.

The R7 wins on release and ecosystem: It is from the newer GCN 2.0 generation (2014) and is an integrated part of a Kaveri APU. The M465 is from the older GCN 3.0 generation (2016) and is a standalone chip.

The M465 wins on the feature set: It has a dedicated 2GB frame buffer, a higher pixel rate, a higher texture rate, and a higher FP32 rate. It also has a dedicated 64-bit memory bus.

The R7 wins on power: At 25W TDP, it is a fraction of the power of a discrete part. It also has a much smaller footprint.

The data suggests a simple rule: if you want to get the most GPU compute performance, the Radeon R7 M465 is the one. If you want a power-efficient integrated GPU that is good enough for everyday graphics and compute work in a thin and light system, the Radeon R7 Graphics is the right pick.

The Verdict

From the measured data, the Radeon R7 M465 is the clear performance winner. The head-to-head result is 45.5% faster in Geekbench OpenCL, and it also wins the average score percentile comparison. It is the only option for users who need a discrete GPU with dedicated memory and high bandwidth.

The Radeon R7 Graphics, however, is not a bad part. It is in the same performance class as a number of discrete mobile parts, and its 25W power envelope makes it a sensible choice for an all-in-one solution in a smaller chassis. The R7 also has a more modern GCN 2.0 architecture and is effectively a more modern design.

The choice comes down to whether you need the absolute maximum compute performance: the M465 is the better buy. If you are building a thin and light system, want to avoid the cost and complexity of a discrete part, and only need standard graphics and occasional compute acceleration, the R7 Graphics is the more appropriate solution. The data is clear: the M465 is the performance part, and the R7 Graphics is the efficiency part.