AMD Radeon R7 M265 vs NVIDIA GeForce 840M Comparison

# NVIDIA GeForce 840M vs AMD Radeon R7 M265

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The single available head-to-head benchmark places these two mobile GPUs in a clear order. In Geekbench OpenCL, the NVIDIA GeForce 840M scores 5,764 points against 4,929 points for the AMD Radeon R7 M265, a delta of 16.9% in NVIDIA's favor. This is the only direct comparison in the dataset, and it establishes NVIDIA as the faster part overall.

Context from the rival rankings reinforces this gap. The GeForce 840M's average benchmark score of 5,322 places it in the 31st percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals cluster tightly around it: the GeForce 930A scores 5,317 (0.1% behind), the GeForce GTX 980M scores 5,308 (0.3% behind), the Radeon R7 M445 scores 5,358 (0.7% ahead), and the GeForce 940M scores 5,284 (0.7% behind). The 840M sits in a dense pack where a few percentage points separate peers.

The Radeon R7 M265, by contrast, averages 4,929 points and sits in the 29th percentile. Its nearest rivals are also clustered: the Radeon R7 M360 matches it at 4,931 (0.0% delta), the FirePro W5130M scores 4,904 (0.5% behind), the GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 8 GB scores 4,901 (0.6% behind), and the GeForce GTS 450 scores 4,893 (0.7% behind). The M265's closest competition is a full tier below the 840M's competition, confirming that the two chips occupy different performance strata.

The OpenCL delta of 16.9% is substantial for GPUs in this class. It is not a marginal victory — the NVIDIA part outperforms the AMD part by nearly one-sixth in raw compute throughput. That gap will translate into observable differences in any OpenCL-accelerated workload, from image processing to general-purpose compute tasks.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations and design philosophies. NVIDIA's GeForce 840M uses the GM108S chip built on the Maxwell architecture, manufactured by TSMC on a 28 nm process. AMD's Radeon R7 M265 uses the Opal chip built on GCN 1.0, also on TSMC's 28 nm process. Both share the same process node and foundry, but the underlying designs diverge significantly.

Transistor counts differ modestly. The GM108S packs 1,020 million transistors into a 77 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 13.2 million per mm². The Opal chip contains 950 million transistors in the same 77 mm² die area, for a density of 12.3 million per mm². NVIDIA fits roughly 7% more transistors into the identical footprint, a sign of a denser, more refined layout.

Clock speeds tell a clear story. The GeForce 840M runs at a base clock of 1,029 MHz with a boost clock of 1,124 MHz. The Radeon R7 M265 operates at a base clock of 725 MHz and a boost clock of 825 MHz. NVIDIA's advantage in clock speed is substantial — the 840M's base clock is 304 MHz higher than the M265's base, and its boost clock is 299 MHz higher. This clock advantage compounds with the architectural efficiency of Maxwell to produce the 16.9% benchmark lead.

Shader configuration is identical in count but different in arrangement. Both GPUs feature 384 shading units and 8 ROPs. The texture mapping units differ: the Radeon R7 M265 has 24 TMUs against 16 on the GeForce 840M. Despite having fewer TMUs, NVIDIA achieves a texture rate of 17.98 GTexel/s versus AMD's 19.80 GTexel/s — the higher clocks partially offset the TMU deficit, but AMD still leads in raw texture fill.

Pixel fill rates favor NVIDIA. The 840M delivers 8.992 GPixel/s versus 6.600 GPixel/s for the M265, a 36% advantage. Floating-point performance follows suit: NVIDIA reaches 863.2 GFLOPS of FP32 compute while AMD manages 633.6 GFLOPS. Both GPUs lack dedicated RT cores and tensor cores, and neither reports FP16 capabilities.

Memory architecture presents a trade-off. The GeForce 840M uses a 64-bit memory bus with DDR3 memory at 1,001 MHz (2 Gbps effective), yielding 16.02 GB/s of bandwidth. The Radeon R7 M265 uses a 128-bit bus with DDR3 at 900 MHz (1,800 Mbps effective), delivering 28.80 GB/s — 80% more bandwidth than NVIDIA. Both cards carry 2 GB of VRAM. This bandwidth advantage works in AMD's favor for memory-heavy workloads, though it does not overcome NVIDIA's compute lead in the OpenCL benchmark.

API support differs slightly. The GeForce 840M supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Radeon R7 M265 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. Both offer modern API coverage, but NVIDIA's Vulkan implementation is newer.

Where Each One Wins

The GeForce 840M wins the only direct benchmark comparison, taking the OpenCL test by 16.9%. This indicates a clear advantage in general-purpose compute and any OpenCL-accelerated application. The 840M's higher clock speeds and superior FP32 throughput (863.2 GFLOPS versus 633.6 GFLOPS) support this result. For users running compute workloads, video processing, or any task that leverages OpenCL, the NVIDIA part is the stronger choice.

The 840M also dominates in pixel fill rate, delivering 8.992 GPixel/s versus 6.600 GPixel/s. This matters for fill-limited scenarios such as high-resolution rendering, post-processing effects, or any workload that stresses the ROP pipeline. The 36% advantage in pixel throughput gives NVIDIA a meaningful edge in rasterization-heavy tasks.

The Radeon R7 M265 has no benchmark wins in the dataset. However, its specification sheet reveals areas where it could plausibly hold an edge. The 128-bit memory bus provides 28.80 GB/s of bandwidth versus 16.02 GB/s for the 840M — an 80% advantage. Applications that are bandwidth-bound, such as texture streaming in large scenes or certain compute kernels that repeatedly access memory, could favor the AMD part despite its lower compute throughput.

Texture fill rate also favors AMD. The M265's 24 TMUs deliver 19.80 GTexel/s against 17.98 GTexel/s for the 840M, a 10% advantage. In texture-heavy workloads where the shader core is not the bottleneck, the M265's higher texture throughput could provide a measurable benefit. Additionally, the M265's DirectX 12 (11_1) support is marginally newer than the 840M's 11_0, though the practical impact of this difference is minor.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce 840M | AMD Radeon R7 M265 |

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

| Chip | GM108S | Opal |

| Architecture | Maxwell | GCN 1.0 |

| Generation | GeForce 800M | Gem System (R7 M200) |

| Transistors | 1,020 million | 950 million |

| Transistor Density | 13.2M / mm² | 12.3M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1,029 MHz | 725 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1,124 MHz | 825 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1,001 MHz / 2 Gbps effective | 900 MHz / 1,800 Mbps effective |

| Memory Bus Width | 64 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 16.02 GB/s | 28.80 GB/s |

| TMUs | 16 | 24 |

| Pixel Rate | 8.992 GPixel/s | 6.600 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 17.98 GTexel/s | 19.80 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 863.2 GFLOPS | 633.6 GFLOPS |

| TDP | 33 W | Not specified |

| Slot Width | IGP | Not specified |

| Power Connectors | None | Not specified |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | Not specified |

| Vulkan Version | 1.4 | 1.2.170 |

| Release Date | 2014-03-11 | 2014-01-08 |

| Predecessor | GeForce 700M | Solar System |

| Successor | GeForce 900M | Polaris Mobile |

Shared specifications include the 28 nm process node, TSMC foundry, 77 mm² die size, 2 GB DDR3 memory, 384 shading units, 8 ROPs, PCIe 3.0 x8 interface, DirectX 12 support, OpenGL 4.6 support, and end-of-life production status. Neither GPU has RT cores, tensor cores, FP16 capability, or a launch MSRP.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in OpenCL benchmarks?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce 840M scores 5,764 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 16.9% higher than the AMD Radeon R7 M265's score of 4,929.

Q: Do these GPUs have the same amount of memory?

A: Yes, both the GeForce 840M and the Radeon R7 M265 feature 2 GB of DDR3 memory, though the M265 uses a wider 128-bit bus while the 840M uses a 64-bit bus.

Q: Which GPU has more memory bandwidth?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 M265 offers 28.80 GB/s of bandwidth, which is 80% higher than the GeForce 840M's 16.02 GB/s, due to its wider 128-bit memory bus.

Q: Are both GPUs manufactured on the same process node?

A: Yes, both the GM108S chip in the NVIDIA card and the Opal chip in the AMD card are built by TSMC on a 28 nm process with an identical 77 mm² die size.

Q: Which GPU has higher clock speeds?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce 840M runs at 1,029 MHz base and 1,124 MHz boost, while the AMD Radeon R7 M265 runs at 725 MHz base and 825 MHz boost.

Q: What is the performance percentile ranking for each GPU?

A: The GeForce 840M sits in the 31st percentile of all GPUs with an average benchmark score of 5,322, while the Radeon R7 M265 sits in the 29th percentile with an average score of 4,929.

The Verdict

The data points decisively toward the NVIDIA GeForce 840M. In the only available head-to-head test, it beats the Radeon R7 M265 by 16.9% in OpenCL performance. Its average benchmark score of 5,322 versus 4,929 places it two percentile points higher in the global GPU distribution. The 840M also delivers superior pixel fill rate (8.992 GPixel/s versus 6.600 GPixel/s), higher FP32 compute (863.2 GFLOPS versus 633.6 GFLOPS), and significantly higher clock speeds (1,124 MHz boost versus 825 MHz boost).

The Radeon R7 M265 does hold specification advantages in memory bandwidth (28.80 GB/s versus 16.02 GB/s) and texture fill rate (19.80 GTexel/s versus 17.98 GTexel/s). Users whose workloads are heavily bandwidth-bound or texture-bound might see those strengths emerge, but the benchmark evidence does not capture any scenario where the M265 outperforms the 840M. The AMD part ships with a wider memory bus and more TMUs, yet it cannot translate those resources into a benchmark victory.

For general-purpose computing, OpenCL acceleration, and overall GPU throughput, the NVIDIA GeForce 840M is the clear choice. For users who prioritize memory bandwidth or texture throughput in specific applications, the Radeon R7 M265 offers those specific advantages, but the data shows no workload where it wins outright. The 840M's higher clock speeds and compute throughput make it the stronger part for the vast majority of tasks.