AMD Radeon R7 M265 vs Intel HD Graphics P530 Comparison

The AMD Radeon R7 M265 and Intel HD Graphics P530 are two end-of-life mobile graphics solutions from different eras, targeting very different segments of the laptop market. The R7 M265 is a discrete entry-level part from AMD’s 2014 lineup, built on the GCN 1.0 architecture with a 28 nm process, while the P530 is Intel’s integrated solution from the 2015 Skylake generation, built on a 14 nm+ process. Benchmark data from Geekbench shows the AMD part holds a lead in OpenCL performance, but the Intel part counters with a newer API feature set and lower power consumption. The data indicates these are closely matched in raw compute, with the AMD card edging ahead by a single benchmark win.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear but narrow victory for the AMD Radeon R7 M265 in raw compute performance. In the only head-to-head benchmark available, Geekbench OpenCL, the R7 M265 scores 4929 against the Intel HD Graphics P530’s 4549, a delta of 8.4%. This places the AMD part at the 29th percentile of all GPUs, while the Intel part sits at the 26th percentile. The R7 M265 also has a higher average benchmark score of 4929 compared to the P530’s 4560. For users prioritizing raw compute throughput in OpenCL workloads, the AMD part is the data-backed choice.

However, the Intel HD Graphics P530 is not without merit. Its nearest rivals tell a different story: it sits within 1.3% of the NVIDIA Quadro M3000M and within 0.4% of the AMD Radeon R5 M230, showing it is competitive with low-end discrete parts. The P530 also supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.3, whereas the R7 M265 only supports DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170. For users on a Skylake platform with no discrete GPU slot, the P530 is the only option, and its 15 W TDP makes it far more power-efficient than the AMD part, which has no listed TDP but is a discrete chip requiring its own power delivery. The verdict: the R7 M265 wins on raw performance; the P530 wins on efficiency and API modernity.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon R7 M265 wins in pure compute performance. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 4929 is 8.4% higher than the Intel part’s 4549. This advantage comes from its hardware configuration: 384 shading units, 24 texture mapping units, and 8 ROPs, compared to the Intel part’s 192 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 3 ROPs. The AMD part also has dedicated 2 GB of DDR3 memory on a 128-bit bus, yielding 28.80 GB/s of bandwidth, while the Intel part relies on system-shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth. In any compute-heavy task that scales with shading units and memory bandwidth, the R7 M265 is the clear winner.

The Intel HD Graphics P530 wins in power efficiency and API support. Its 15 W TDP is a hard number from the fact pack, and as an integrated graphics processor (IGP), it requires no separate memory or power connectors. The P530 also supports a higher DirectX feature level (12_1 vs 11_1) and a newer Vulkan version (1.3 vs 1.2.170). For modern games or applications that leverage these newer APIs, the Intel part has a functional advantage despite its lower raw compute. The P530 also has a higher boost clock relative to its base clock (1000 MHz boost vs 350 MHz base), allowing it to scale up when thermal headroom permits, whereas the R7 M265 has a narrower range (825 MHz boost vs 725 MHz base).

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD Radeon R7 M265 uses the GCN 1.0 architecture, manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC, with a die size of 77 mm² and 950 million transistors. This gives it a transistor density of 12.3 million per mm². The Intel HD Graphics P530 uses Intel’s Generation 9.0 architecture (Skylake GT2), manufactured on a 14 nm+ process at Intel, with a larger die size of 123 mm² but no listed transistor count or density. The AMD part is a discrete chip with a PCIe 3.0 x8 interface, while the Intel part uses a Ring Bus interface and is an IGP with motherboard-dependent display outputs.

Memory architecture differs significantly. The R7 M265 has 2 GB of dedicated DDR3 memory on a 128-bit bus, with a memory clock of 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective) and bandwidth of 28.80 GB/s. The P530 uses system-shared memory, with type, bus width, and bandwidth all listed as system-dependent. This means the AMD part has predictable memory performance, while the Intel part’s performance varies with the host system’s RAM configuration. The R7 M265 also has a higher pixel rate (6.600 GPixel/s vs 3.000 GPixel/s) and texture rate (19.80 GTexel/s vs 16.00 GTexel/s), reflecting its larger ROP and TMU counts.

Compute capabilities show a similar split. The R7 M265 delivers 633.6 GFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the P530 delivers 384.0 GFLOPS. However, the P530 has a listed FP16 performance of 768.0 GFLOPS (2:1), while the R7 M265 has no FP16 figure, suggesting the Intel part has better half-precision throughput. Both support OpenGL 4.6, but the P530’s DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.3 support is newer than the R7 M265’s DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170. The P530 also has a lower base clock of 350 MHz versus the R7 M265’s 725 MHz, but a higher boost clock of 1000 MHz versus 825 MHz.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher raw OpenCL score?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 M265 scores 4929 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 8.4% higher than the Intel HD Graphics P530’s 4549. The AMD part also has a higher average benchmark score of 4929 versus 4560.

Q: Does the Intel HD Graphics P530 support newer APIs than the AMD Radeon R7 M265?

A: Yes. The Intel part supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.3, while the AMD part only supports DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170. Both support OpenGL 4.6.

Q: What is the memory configuration of each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 M265 has 2 GB of dedicated DDR3 memory on a 128-bit bus with 28.80 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel HD Graphics P530 uses system-shared memory, with its type, bus width, and bandwidth all being system-dependent.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 M265 has 384 shading units, while the Intel HD Graphics P530 has 192. The AMD part also has more TMUs (24 vs 16) and ROPs (8 vs 3).

Q: What is the power consumption of the Intel HD Graphics P530?

A: The Intel HD Graphics P530 has a TDP of 15 W. The AMD Radeon R7 M265 has no listed TDP in the data.

Q: How do these GPUs compare to their nearest rivals?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 M265 is within 0.7% of the NVIDIA GeForce GTS 450 (score 4893) and within 0.5% of the AMD FirePro W5130M (score 4904). The Intel HD Graphics P530 is within 0.2% of the AMD Radeon RX 560 (score 4569) and within 1.3% of the NVIDIA Quadro M3000M (score 4621).

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only head-to-head benchmark available is Geekbench OpenCL, and it shows a decisive win for the AMD Radeon R7 M265. The AMD part scores 4929, while the Intel HD Graphics P530 scores 4549, giving the AMD part an 8.4% advantage. This is the sole benchmark in the head-to-head data, and it accounts for the AMD part’s 1-0 win record. The margin is substantial enough to be meaningful: 380 points separate the two, which is larger than the gap between the AMD part and its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon R7 M360 (score 4931, delta 0%).

The Intel HD Graphics P530’s Vulkan score of 4571 is worth noting, though no direct comparison exists for the AMD part. This score is close to its OpenCL score of 4549, suggesting consistent performance across APIs. However, the AMD part’s OpenCL score of 4929 places it in a different performance tier. The AMD part’s nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 8 GB (score 4901, delta 0.6%), which is remarkable given the RTX 5060 Ti is a far newer and larger chip; the data shows the R7 M265 holds its own in this specific compute test.

The Intel part’s rivals cluster around its score: the AMD Radeon RX 560 (4569, -0.2%), AMD Radeon R5 M230 (4577, -0.4%), and AMD FirePro W4190M (4505, 1.2%). This indicates the P530 is competitive with entry-level discrete GPUs from the same era. The AMD R7 M265’s rivals, however, include the NVIDIA GeForce GTS 450 (4893, 0.7%), a desktop card from 2010, showing the R7 M265 punches above its mobile class in compute. The data overall shows the AMD part winning the compute crown, but the Intel part’s lower power draw and modern API support make it a viable alternative for integrated-only platforms.