AMD Radeon R7 M365X vs NVIDIA GeForce MX130 Comparison

NVIDIA GeForce MX130 and AMD Radeon R7 M365X are both end-of-life mobile GPUs that land in the same performance tier, with the MX130 holding a slim aggregate edge. The MX130 scores 5508 average across benchmarks versus 5416 for the R7 M365X, a difference of roughly 1.7%. Both sit at the 32nd percentile among all GPUs, meaning they occupy the same bracket in the overall performance distribution. The head-to-head data shows the MX130 winning both recorded tests, but the margins are narrow enough that the choice between them hinges on specific workload characteristics rather than a clear overall winner.

Where Each One Wins

The MX130 takes the outright win in both benchmark categories recorded. In Geekbench OpenCL, it scores 6102 against 5939 for the R7 M365X, a 2.7% advantage. In Geekbench Vulkan, the gap narrows to 4914 versus 4893, just 0.4% ahead. So for compute-oriented tasks that leverage OpenCL or Vulkan APIs, the NVIDIA part holds a measurable, if modest, edge.

The R7 M365X, despite losing both head-to-head tests, is not without its own strengths. Its memory subsystem is substantially wider: 128-bit bus versus 64-bit, yielding 64.00 GB/s of bandwidth compared to 40.10 GB/s. That is a 59.6% bandwidth advantage for the AMD part. In workloads that are memory-bound rather than compute-bound — such as texture streaming or certain types of image processing — the R7 M365X's wider bus can compensate for its lower compute throughput. The data does not include a dedicated memory-bandwidth benchmark, but the specification difference is significant enough to matter in real-world scenarios.

The AMD also supports DirectX 12 (11_1) versus the MX130's DirectX 12 (11_0), a minor API feature-level difference. For Vulkan, the R7 M365X reports version 1.2.170 compared to the MX130's 1.4, which could affect compatibility with newer Vulkan extensions, though the benchmark scores suggest the practical impact is minimal.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural families and different process nodes, though both use 28 nm TSMC manufacturing. The MX130 is built on NVIDIA's Maxwell architecture with the GM108S chip, packing 1,020 million transistors into a 77 mm² die. The R7 M365X uses AMD's GCN 1.0 architecture with the Litho chip, containing 950 million transistors on the same 77 mm² die size. The MX130 has a higher transistor density at 13.2M / mm² versus 12.3M / mm² for the AMD part.

Both GPUs feature identical compute resources: 384 shading units, 24 texture mapping units, and 8 raster operation pipelines. This means the core geometry of both chips is the same, but they operate at different clock speeds. The MX130 runs at a base clock of 1109 MHz with a boost clock of 1189 MHz, while the R7 M365X has no base or boost clock listed in the data. The MX130's higher clocks directly translate to its compute advantages: 913.2 GFLOPS FP32 versus 633.6 GFLOPS, a 44.1% difference. Pixel rate is 9.512 GPixel/s versus 6.600 GPixel/s, and texture rate is 28.54 GTexel/s versus 19.80 GTexel/s.

Memory configurations diverge significantly. The MX130 uses 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 64-bit bus at 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective), yielding 40.10 GB/s. The R7 M365X uses 1024 MB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus at 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective), yielding 64.00 GB/s. The AMD part trades capacity for bandwidth. The MX130 also has a lower TDP at 30 W, while the R7 M365X has no TDP listed. The MX130 is an integrated GPU (IGP) with no power connectors, while the R7 M365X has no slot width or power connector data.

The bus interface differs: PCIe 3.0 x4 for the MX130 versus PCIe 3.0 x8 for the R7 M365X. The MX130's display outputs are listed as "Portable Device Dependent," while the R7 M365X has no display output data. The MX130 was released in 2017, while the R7 M365X came out in 2015, and the AMD part has a predecessor ("Solar System") and successor ("Polaris Mobile") listed, whereas the NVIDIA part has neither.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Geekbench OpenCL test is the largest single margin in this comparison. The MX130 scores 6102, which is 2.7% higher than the R7 M365X's 5939. That margin is modest but consistent with the MX130's higher compute throughput — 913.2 GFLOPS versus 633.6 GFLOPS — even though the AMD part has 59.6% more memory bandwidth. The OpenCL workload likely favors raw shader compute over memory access, which explains why the MX130's clock speed advantage shows up here.

The Geekbench Vulkan test narrows the gap dramatically. The MX130 scores 4914 against 4893, a difference of just 0.4%. This near-tie suggests that the Vulkan workload is more balanced between compute and memory, allowing the R7 M365X's wider memory bus to offset some of the NVIDIA part's compute lead. The MX130's Vulkan score is also notably lower than its OpenCL score (4914 vs 6102), while the R7 M365X shows a similar pattern (4893 vs 5939), indicating both GPUs perform relatively worse in Vulkan than in OpenCL.

Looking at the nearest rivals puts these numbers in context. The MX130's closest competitor is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M, which scores 5501 — just 0.1% behind. The AMD Radeon R7 M440 is 0.5% behind at 5483, and the AMD FirePro M4000 is 0.5% ahead at 5537. The R7 M365X's nearest rival is the AMD Radeon 610M at 5444, which is 0.5% ahead of the R7 M365X. The Intel UHD Graphics P630 scores 5370, 0.9% behind, and the NVIDIA Quadro M4000 scores 5467, 0.9% ahead. These tight deltas confirm that both GPUs sit in a crowded mid-pack where small benchmark differences separate competitors.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has more memory bandwidth?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 M365X has substantially more memory bandwidth at 64.00 GB/s versus 40.10 GB/s for the MX130. This comes from its 128-bit bus compared to the MX130's 64-bit bus, though the MX130 compensates with faster memory clocks (1253 MHz vs 1000 MHz).

Q: Is the MX130 faster in all recorded benchmarks?

A: Yes. The MX130 wins both head-to-head tests: Geekbench OpenCL (6102 vs 5939, 2.7% ahead) and Geekbench Vulkan (4914 vs 4893, 0.4% ahead). It also has a higher average benchmark score of 5508 versus 5416.

Q: Do both GPUs have the same compute core configuration?

A: Yes, both have 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. However, the MX130 runs at higher clocks (1109 MHz base, 1189 MHz boost) versus no listed clocks for the R7 M365X, resulting in 913.2 GFLOPS versus 633.6 GFLOPS FP32 performance.

Q: Which GPU supports a newer DirectX version?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 M365X supports DirectX 12 (11_1), while the MX130 supports DirectX 12 (11_0). The AMD part has a slightly higher feature level, though both are DirectX 12 capable.

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

A: The MX130 is 0.1% behind the GTX 765M and 0.5% behind the FirePro M4000, while being 0.5% ahead of the R7 M440 and 0.7% ahead of the Quadro M4000. The R7 M365X is 0.5% behind the Radeon 610M and 0.9% behind the Quadro M4000, while being 0.9% ahead of the UHD Graphics P630 and 1.1% ahead of the R7 M445.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference?

A: The MX130 has 2 GB of GDDR5, while the R7 M365X has 1024 MB (1 GB) of GDDR5. The MX130 has twice the capacity, but the R7 M365X has the wider memory bus.

The Verdict

The data points to a narrow but consistent win for the NVIDIA GeForce MX130. It wins both recorded benchmarks and has a higher average score, higher compute throughput (913.2 GFLOPS vs 633.6 GFLOPS), and double the memory capacity (2 GB vs 1024 MB). Its 30 W TDP also makes it a lower-power option, which matters for thin-and-light laptops where the R7 M365X has no power specification listed. The MX130 is also two years newer in release date, which may explain its better compute efficiency per transistor.

The case for the AMD Radeon R7 M365X rests entirely on memory bandwidth. Its 64.00 GB/s versus 40.10 GB/s is a massive advantage that could matter in specific workloads that are bandwidth-limited. It also has a wider PCIe interface (x8 vs x4) and a slightly newer DirectX feature level. For users whose applications are known to be memory-heavy, the R7 M365X might hold up better despite losing the synthetic benchmarks.

For general purpose use, pick the MX130. It wins the benchmarks, has more VRAM, and consumes less power. For specialized memory-bound tasks, the R7 M365X's bandwidth advantage is the only compelling reason to choose it, and even then the benchmark data does not show that advantage translating into a win in either recorded test.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce MX130 | AMD Radeon R7 M365X |

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

| Architecture | Maxwell | GCN 1.0 |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |

| Transistors | 1,020 million | 950 million |

| Die Size | 77 mm² | 77 mm² |

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

| Base Clock | 1109 MHz | Not listed |

| Boost Clock | 1189 MHz | Not listed |

| Memory Clock | 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective) | 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 2 GB | 1024 MB |

| Memory Bus Width | 64 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 40.10 GB/s | 64.00 GB/s |

| FP32 Performance | 913.2 GFLOPS | 633.6 GFLOPS |

| Pixel Rate | 9.512 GPixel/s | 6.600 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 28.54 GTexel/s | 19.80 GTexel/s |

| TDP | 30 W | Not listed |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x4 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |

| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 12 (11_1) |

| Vulkan | 1.4 | 1.2.170 |

| Release Date | 2017-11-16 | 2015-05-04 |