AMD Radeon R7 M445 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670MX Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670MX holds a clear performance advantage over the AMD Radeon R7 M445 in the available benchmark data, winning the only direct comparison by a significant margin. This verdict is driven by the GTX 670MX’s superior compute resources and memory subsystem, which outclass the R7 M445 despite the latter’s newer architecture and higher clock speeds.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The sole direct benchmark comparison available is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and the results are unambiguous. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670MX scores 6,125 points, while the AMD Radeon R7 M445 scores 5,358 points. This yields a 14.3% advantage for the NVIDIA part, a substantial lead that underscores the GTX 670MX’s greater raw compute throughput.

This 14.3% delta is not a marginal win; it places the GTX 670MX in a different performance tier. In the broader context of the benchmark database, the GTX 670MX sits at the 33rd percentile of all GPUs, while the R7 M445 sits at the 31st percentile. While both are near the lower end of the spectrum, the GTX 670MX’s average benchmark score of 5,721 is notably higher than the R7 M445’s 5,358.

The GTX 670MX also wins the overall head-to-head matchup with a 1-0 record. The data shows no benchmark where the R7 M445 manages to outscore the GTX 670MX. The R7 M445’s closest rival in the database is the Intel UHD Graphics P630, which scores 5,370, a mere 0.2% ahead. Meanwhile, the GTX 670MX’s closest rival is the Intel Iris Pro Graphics P6300 at 5,712, which is only 0.2% behind, and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 550 Ti at 5,731, which is 0.2% ahead. This indicates that the GTX 670MX is competitive with a slightly higher class of integrated and older discrete parts, whereas the R7 M445 competes with entry-level mobile solutions.

In practical terms, the 14.3% lead in OpenCL means the GTX 670MX will render compute workloads, such as OpenCL-accelerated applications, noticeably faster. The R7 M445’s performance is closer to that of the NVIDIA GeForce 840M (5,322, a 0.7% gap) and the NVIDIA GeForce 930A (5,317, a 0.8% gap), confirming its position as a lower-tier option.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs represent fundamentally different design philosophies and generations. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670MX is built on the Kepler architecture, using the GK104 chip, and belongs to the GeForce 600M generation. The AMD Radeon R7 M445, in contrast, uses the GCN 3.0 architecture with the Meso chip, and is part of the Gem System (R7 M400) generation. This architectural gap explains many of the performance differences.

Both GPUs are manufactured on the same 28 nm process node at TSMC, but their physical designs diverge significantly. The GTX 670MX is a much larger chip, with a die size of 294 mm² and 3,540 million transistors, resulting in a transistor density of 12.0M / mm². The R7 M445 is far smaller, with a die size of 125 mm² and 1,550 million transistors, yielding a slightly higher transistor density of 12.4M / mm². The GTX 670MX’s larger die area allows it to pack considerably more execution hardware.

The compute unit counts confirm this disparity. The GTX 670MX features 960 shading units, 80 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 24 raster operation pipelines (ROPs). The R7 M445 is equipped with only 320 shading units, 20 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. This means the GTX 670MX has three times the shading units and four times the TMUs, giving it a massive theoretical throughput advantage. The pixel rate of the GTX 670MX is 12.02 GPixel/s, compared to 7.360 GPixel/s for the R7 M445. The texture rate is even more lopsided: 48.08 GTexel/s versus 18.40 GTexel/s.

Clock speeds tell a different story. The R7 M445 runs at a base clock of 780 MHz and a boost clock of 920 MHz, while the GTX 670MX is locked at 601 MHz for both base and boost. The R7 M445’s higher clocks, however, cannot compensate for its far smaller execution footprint. The FP32 performance, a key metric for general compute, is 1,153.9 GFLOPS for the GTX 670MX versus 588.8 GFLOPS for the R7 M445. Notably, the R7 M445 supports FP16 at 588.8 GFLOPS (1:1 ratio), while the GTX 670MX has no listed FP16 capability.

The memory subsystems also diverge sharply. The GTX 670MX uses 3 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 192-bit bus, delivering 67.20 GB/s of bandwidth. The R7 M445 has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 64-bit bus, yielding only 32.00 GB/s. The GTX 670MX’s bus width is three times wider, leading to double the bandwidth, which is critical for texture-heavy and high-resolution workloads. The R7 M445’s memory clock is higher (1000 MHz, 4 Gbps effective) versus the GTX 670MX’s 700 MHz (2.8 Gbps effective), but the narrow bus negates this advantage.

Connectivity and power also differ. The GTX 670MX uses a PCIe 3.0 x16 interface, while the R7 M445 uses a PCIe 3.0 x8 interface. The GTX 670MX has a TDP of 75 W and requires no power connectors, whereas the R7 M445 has no listed TDP and is described as an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with a slot width of IGP, suggesting it is designed for low-power, integrated use. The GTX 670MX supports DirectX 12 (11_0), while the R7 M445 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), giving AMD a feature-level advantage. Both support OpenGL 4.6, but the GTX 670MX has Vulkan 1.2.175 support versus 1.2.170 for the R7 M445.

The Verdict

From the data, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670MX is the superior performer for anyone prioritizing raw compute and rendering speed. Its 14.3% lead in OpenCL, combined with its higher pixel rate (12.02 GPixel/s vs 7.360 GPixel/s) and texture rate (48.08 GTexel/s vs 18.40 GTexel/s), makes it the clear choice for gaming or GPU-accelerated tasks. The GTX 670MX’s 67.20 GB/s memory bandwidth is more than double the R7 M445’s 32.00 GB/s, which will translate to better performance in bandwidth-sensitive scenarios like high-resolution textures or anti-aliasing.

The AMD Radeon R7 M445 is not without merit, but its strengths are limited to power efficiency and API support. It offers a more modern DirectX 12 (12_0) feature level and FP16 compute capability, which could be relevant for specific modern workloads. However, its lower shading unit count (320 vs 960) and narrower 64-bit memory bus place it at a decisive disadvantage. Its average benchmark score of 5,358 is well below the GTX 670MX’s 5,721.

For a user choosing between these two, the GTX 670MX is the only rational pick for performance. The R7 M445’s only potential advantage is its lower power footprint, given the lack of a TDP rating and its IGP classification. If the system must be extremely low-power, the R7 M445 might be acceptable, but it will deliver significantly lower frame rates and longer compute times. The GTX 670MX, despite being an older design, offers a level of performance that the R7 M445 cannot match.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in the Geekbench OpenCL benchmark?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670MX is faster, scoring 6,125 points compared to the AMD Radeon R7 M445’s 5,358 points, a 14.3% advantage.

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in memory bandwidth?

A: The GTX 670MX has a bandwidth of 67.20 GB/s, while the R7 M445 has 32.00 GB/s. The GTX 670MX’s 192-bit bus is three times wider than the R7 M445’s 64-bit bus.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670MX has 960 shading units, while the AMD Radeon R7 M445 has 320 shading units. This gives the GTX 670MX a three-to-one advantage in this key compute resource.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon R7 M445 support a newer DirectX version?

A: Yes, the R7 M445 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), while the GTX 670MX supports DirectX 12 (11_0). This gives the AMD part a more modern feature level for API compatibility.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each GPU?

A: The GTX 670MX has an average benchmark score of 5,721, while the R7 M445 has an average score of 5,358.

Q: Which GPU has a higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 M445 has a higher boost clock of 920 MHz, compared to the GTX 670MX’s fixed 601 MHz. However, the GTX 670MX still wins on overall performance due to its larger chip.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670MX wins decisively in all compute and rendering metrics. It is the better choice for gaming, particularly at higher resolutions or with demanding graphical settings, thanks to its higher pixel rate (12.02 GPixel/s) and double the memory bandwidth. Its 1,153.9 GFLOPS FP32 performance also makes it more suitable for general-purpose GPU compute tasks like video encoding, image processing, or physics simulations. The GTX 670MX’s 960 shading units and 80 TMUs provide a massive advantage in shader-intensive workloads and texture filtering.

The AMD Radeon R7 M445’s wins are more niche. Its support for DirectX 12 (12_0) offers a more modern API feature set, which could enable certain visual effects or optimizations in newer titles that are not available on the GTX 670MX’s DirectX 12 (11_0). Additionally, its FP16 compute capability (588.8 GFLOPS) could be leveraged in machine learning or media applications that support half-precision math. The R7 M445’s higher clock speeds (920 MHz boost) suggest it may have better single-threaded performance in certain lightweight tasks, but this is not reflected in the aggregate benchmark scores. Its larger 4 GB memory capacity could also be an advantage in specific use cases that require holding more data in VRAM, though the lower bandwidth will limit the benefit.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670MX | AMD Radeon R7 M445 |

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

| Architecture | Kepler | GCN 3.0 |

| Chip | GK104 | Meso |

| Generation | GeForce 600M | Gem System (R7 M400) |

| Transistors | 3,540 million | 1,550 million |

| Die Size | 294 mm² | 125 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 12.0M / mm² | 12.4M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 601 MHz | 780 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 601 MHz | 920 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 700 MHz (2.8 Gbps effective) | 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 3 GB | 4 GB |

| Memory Bus Width | 192 bit | 64 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 67.20 GB/s | 32.00 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 960 | 320 |

| TMUs | 80 | 20 |

| ROPs | 24 | 8 |

| Pixel Rate | 12.02 GPixel/s | 7.360 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 48.08 GTexel/s | 18.40 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 1,153.9 GFLOPS | 588.8 GFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | None listed | 588.8 GFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 75 W | None listed |

| Slot Width | None listed | IGP |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |

| DirectX Support | 12 (11_0) | 12 (12_0) |

| Vulkan Support | 1.2.175 | 1.2.170 |

| Release Date | 2012-09-30 | 2016-05-14 |