AMD Radeon R7 M265 vs NVIDIA GeForce MX130 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records a single direct head-to-head comparison between the NVIDIA GeForce MX130 and the AMD Radeon R7 M265, using the Geekbench OpenCL workload. The result is decisive: the MX130 scores 6102 points, while the R7 M265 scores 4929 points. That is a 23.8% advantage for the NVIDIA part, a substantial gap in raw compute throughput for this particular test.

Looking at the broader benchmark averages, the story remains consistent. The MX130 carries an average benchmark score of 5508 across all recorded tests, while the R7 M265 averages 4929. The MX130 also sits in the 32nd percentile of all GPUs in the database, compared to the 29th percentile for the AMD part. In practical terms, the MX130 is positioned a small step above its rival in overall ranking, though both occupy the lower portion of the performance spectrum.

The MX130's nearest rivals in the database help contextualize its score. It sits within 0.1% of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M, which averages 5501. It is 0.5% ahead of the AMD Radeon R7 M440 (5483) and 0.7% ahead of the NVIDIA Quadro M4000 (5467). The only rival that edges it out is the AMD FirePro M4000 at 5537, a 0.5% difference. These are tight margins, indicating that the MX130 is clustered with a group of mid-range mobile and workstation GPUs from roughly the same era.

For the R7 M265, the nearest rivals show a similar clustering but at a lower performance tier. The AMD Radeon R7 M360 is effectively tied at 4931, a 0% delta. The AMD FirePro W5130M scores 4904, which is 0.5% behind the R7 M265. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 8 GB appears in this list at 4901, 0.6% behind, and the NVIDIA GeForce GTS 450 scores 4893, 0.7% behind. The presence of a much newer card like the RTX 5060 Ti 8 GB in this grouping is notable: it indicates that the R7 M265's average score is low enough that even a modern entry-level card lands in the same performance band.

The recorded OpenCL data shows the MX130 with a 23.8% lead over the R7 M265 in that single test. When comparing average scores, the MX130 leads by roughly 11.7% (5508 versus 4929). The percentile gap is smaller, just 3 positions, but the percentile metric is relative to all GPUs in the database, so it compresses differences at the lower end of the distribution.

Where Each One Wins

The MX130 wins the only recorded head-to-head benchmark, and it also holds the higher average score and the higher percentile ranking. Its OpenCL score of 6102 is the strongest recorded result for either GPU in this comparison. The R7 M265 has no recorded wins in any head-to-head test.

In terms of compute workloads, the MX130's advantage is clear. Its FP32 throughput is 913.2 GFLOPS, versus 633.6 GFLOPS for the R7 M265. That is a 44% difference in raw floating-point performance, which explains why the OpenCL score gap is so pronounced. The texture rate tells a similar story: 28.54 GTexel/s for the MX130, compared to 19.80 GTexel/s for the AMD part. Pixel rate also favors the MX130, at 9.512 GPixel/s versus 6.600 GPixel/s.

Memory bandwidth is another area where the MX130 leads, though the margin is smaller. The MX130 delivers 40.10 GB/s over a 64-bit bus using GDDR5 memory. The R7 M265 manages 28.80 GB/s over a 128-bit bus using DDR3. The MX130 achieves higher bandwidth with half the bus width, thanks to the faster GDDR5 memory running at 5 Gbps effective, versus 1800 Mbps effective for the DDR3 in the AMD part.

The R7 M265 does have some structural advantages that do not translate into benchmark wins. Its 128-bit memory bus is twice as wide as the MX130's 64-bit bus, and its PCIe interface is PCIe 3.0 x8, compared to PCIe 3.0 x4 on the MX130. However, the recorded data shows that these advantages do not overcome the MX130's higher clocks and faster memory technology in compute tests.

The R7 M265 also supports DirectX 12 (11_1), one minor revision newer than the MX130's DirectX 12 (11_0). Both support OpenGL 4.6. The MX130 supports Vulkan 1.4, while the R7 M265 supports Vulkan 1.2.170, so the NVIDIA part has a newer Vulkan API level.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear winner: the NVIDIA GeForce MX130 outperforms the AMD Radeon R7 M265 in every recorded metric that matters for compute performance. The OpenCL head-to-head shows a 23.8% lead, the average benchmark score is 11.7% higher, and the percentile ranking is 3 positions higher. The MX130's higher clock speeds, faster memory, and greater throughput in pixel, texture, and FP32 operations all reinforce this conclusion.

A user choosing between these two should select the MX130 if the priority is raw compute performance in OpenCL workloads. The 6102 OpenCL score versus 4929 is a substantial margin, and the MX130's placement among its nearest rivals (within 0.7% of the Quadro M4000, within 0.5% of the FirePro M4000) suggests it is a more capable part overall.

The R7 M265 is not without merit in specific contexts. Its 128-bit memory bus and PCIe 3.0 x8 interface indicate a design that could handle memory-heavy tasks with lower latency, but the recorded benchmark data does not show any test where this translates into a win. The R7 M265 also has a slightly newer DirectX feature level, but that does not offset the performance gap.

For users who only need basic graphics acceleration and are constrained by system compatibility, the R7 M265 remains functional. Its average score of 4929 places it in the same performance band as the R7 M360 and the FirePro W5130M, so it is competitive with its immediate peers. But against the MX130, the data is unambiguous.

The MX130 is the recommended choice based on all recorded measurements. It is faster, has a higher percentile ranking, and delivers better results in the only direct comparison available. The R7 M265 is a viable option only when the MX130 is not available or not compatible with the target system.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher OpenCL benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce MX130 scores 6102 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the AMD Radeon R7 M265 scores 4929. That is a 23.8% difference in favor of the MX130.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The MX130 has an average benchmark score of 5508, while the R7 M265 averages 4929. The MX130 leads by approximately 11.7%.

Q: What memory type and bandwidth does each GPU use?

A: The MX130 uses 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 64-bit bus, delivering 40.10 GB/s of bandwidth. The R7 M265 uses 2 GB of DDR3 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 28.80 GB/s.

Q: Which GPU has higher clock speeds?

A: The MX130 has a base clock of 1109 MHz and a boost clock of 1189 MHz. The R7 M265 has a base clock of 725 MHz and a boost clock of 825 MHz.

Q: What are the FP32 performance figures for each GPU?

A: The MX130 delivers 913.2 GFLOPS of FP32 performance. The R7 M265 delivers 633.6 GFLOPS.

Q: How do the two GPUs rank among all GPUs in the database?

A: The MX130 sits in the 32nd percentile of all GPUs, while the R7 M265 sits in the 29th percentile.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural lineages. The NVIDIA GeForce MX130 is built on the Maxwell architecture, using the GM108S chip. The AMD Radeon R7 M265 uses the GCN 1.0 architecture, with the Opal chip. Both are manufactured by TSMC on a 28 nm process node, and both have a die size of 77 mm².

Transistor counts are close but not identical. The MX130 contains 1,020 million transistors, resulting in a transistor density of 13.2 million per mm². The R7 M265 contains 950 million transistors, with a density of 12.3 million per mm². The MX130 packs slightly more logic into the same die area.

The compute units are configured identically in terms of raw counts. Both GPUs have 384 shading units, 24 texture mapping units, and 8 render output units. However, clock speeds differ significantly. The MX130 runs at 1109 MHz base and 1189 MHz boost, while the R7 M265 runs at 725 MHz base and 825 MHz boost. These clock differences drive most of the performance gap.

Memory architecture is another key differentiator. The MX130 uses 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 64-bit bus, with memory clocked at 1253 MHz and an effective data rate of 5 Gbps. This yields 40.10 GB/s of bandwidth. The R7 M265 uses 2 GB of DDR3 on a 128-bit bus, with memory clocked at 900 MHz and an effective data rate of 1800 Mbps. This yields 28.80 GB/s. The wider bus on the AMD part does not compensate for the slower memory technology.

The MX130 is an integrated GPU (IGP) with a 30 W TDP and no power connectors. The R7 M265 has no recorded TDP, slot width, or power connector data in the database. The MX130 uses a PCIe 3.0 x4 interface, while the R7 M265 uses PCIe 3.0 x8. The display outputs for the MX130 are listed as portable device dependent, while the R7 M265 has no recorded display outputs.

API support differs slightly. The MX130 supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The R7 M265 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The AMD part has a marginally newer DirectX feature level, while the NVIDIA part has a newer Vulkan version.

The production status for both GPUs is end-of-life. The MX130 was released on 2017-11-16, while the R7 M265 was released on 2014-01-08. The R7 M265 lists its predecessor as Solar System and its successor as Polaris Mobile, while the MX130 has no recorded predecessor or successor.