AMD Radeon R7 M465 vs NVIDIA GeForce MX230 Comparison

NVIDIA GeForce MX230 and AMD Radeon R7 M465 are both end-of-life mobile graphics solutions, but they represent different design philosophies and performance tiers. The MX230, built on a newer 14 nm process, delivers a lower average benchmark score of 6077, while the older 28 nm R7 M465 posts 5841. The data shows a close contest where architectural efficiency and raw shader throughput pull in opposite directions.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct head-to-head benchmark available is Geekbench OpenCL, and it narrowly favors the AMD Radeon R7 M465. The AMD part scores 5841 against the MX230’s 5739, a delta of -1.7% from the NVIDIA GPU’s perspective. That is a margin of roughly 102 points, or about 1.8% — well within run-to-run variance for most OpenCL workloads, but the result is what it is: AMD wins the single comparative test.

Looking at broader average scores, the MX230 actually holds a numerical edge. Its average benchmark score of 6077 is 236 points higher than the R7 M465’s 5841, a difference of about 4%. However, the MX230’s average is pulled up by its Geekbench Vulkan score of 6414, a test the AMD GPU simply does not have a recorded result for. In the only shared test, AMD is ahead.

The nearest-rival data puts both cards in similar company, though the competitive field differs slightly. The MX230 sits at the 35th percentile of all GPUs, with its closest neighbor being the NVIDIA RTX A400 (average score 6078, delta 0%). It is also within 0.5% of the Quadro P2000 (6049) and 1% of the AMD Radeon 760M (6019). The Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 (6117) is the only rival in that group that beats it, by -0.7%. The R7 M465, at the 33rd percentile, finds its nearest match in the AMD Radeon R5 M435 (5859, delta -0.3%) and trails the Intel UHD Graphics 730 (5929) by -1.5% while leading the GeForce GTX 550 Ti (5731) by 1.9%.

What stands out is that neither card is decisively faster than the other in aggregate. The MX230’s average is higher, but that is largely due to the Vulkan result. In the compute-oriented OpenCL test, AMD’s older architecture holds a slim but real advantage. The delta of -1.7% is the single most important number here — it tells you these are effectively peer-level parts in raw compute, with the AMD GPU eking out a marginal win in the one metric where both have data.

The Verdict

From the data, the AMD Radeon R7 M465 wins the only direct comparison, so a scoreboard-based verdict goes to AMD. But the margin is so thin — a -1.7% delta in OpenCL — that it would be misleading to call it a clear victor. The MX230 counters with a higher overall average benchmark score (6077 vs 5841) and a Vulkan result (6414) that the R7 M465 cannot match, since no Vulkan score is recorded for the AMD part.

For a user prioritizing compute performance in OpenCL applications, the R7 M465 is the safer choice based on the head-to-head result. For anyone who needs Vulkan support or values the higher aggregate benchmark standing, the MX230 is the one to pick. The MX230 also offers a newer API baseline (Vulkan 1.4 vs 1.2.170) and a much lower power envelope at 10 W TDP, which matters in thin-and-light laptops. The R7 M465 has no listed TDP, but its 28 nm process and older GCN 3.0 architecture suggest it is less efficient, though that is inference from the process node, not a measured figure.

If you are choosing between two used laptops with these GPUs, the data says: pick the MX230 for efficiency and Vulkan capability, pick the R7 M465 if your workload is purely OpenCL-bound and you want the slight edge there. There is no scenario where one is dramatically superior — these are near-identical performers separated by a single percentage point in the only shared test.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different foundries and process nodes. The NVIDIA GeForce MX230 uses a GP108 chip on Samsung’s 14 nm process, while the AMD Radeon R7 M465 uses a Topaz chip on TSMC’s 28 nm process. That is a two-generation gap in lithography, and it shows in transistor density: the MX230 packs 1,800 million transistors into a 74 mm² die for a density of 24.3M per mm², whereas the R7 M465 fits 1,550 million transistors into 125 mm², a density of just 12.4M per mm². The NVIDIA part is nearly twice as dense.

Architecturally, the MX230 is based on Pascal, while the R7 M465 uses GCN 3.0. The shader configurations reflect their different design targets. The MX230 has 256 shading units, 16 texture mapping units, and 16 ROPs. The R7 M465 has more shading units (384) and more TMUs (24), but only 8 ROPs. That explains the pixel rate disparity: the MX230 outputs 24.50 GPixel/s versus just 8.192 GPixel/s for the AMD part. Texture rate is nearly identical — 24.50 GTexel/s for NVIDIA, 24.58 GTexel/s for AMD — because the AMD GPU’s higher TMU count compensates for its lower clock speeds.

Clock speeds are a major differentiator. The MX230 runs at a 1519 MHz base and 1531 MHz boost, while the R7 M465 starts at 730 MHz base and boosts to 1024 MHz. Despite the AMD card having 50% more shading units, its FP32 throughput is essentially identical: 783.9 GFLOPS for NVIDIA versus 786.4 GFLOPS for AMD. The higher clocks on the MX230 offset the raw core count advantage of the R7 M465.

Memory subsystems are similar in width but different in speed. Both use 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 64-bit bus. The MX230 runs its memory at 1502 MHz (6 Gbps effective) for 48.06 GB/s of bandwidth. The R7 M465 runs at 1125 MHz (4.5 Gbps effective) for 36.00 GB/s. That is a 33% bandwidth advantage for the NVIDIA part, which likely helps in texture-heavy and bandwidth-sensitive workloads.

Other notable differences: the MX230 has a 10 W TDP and is listed as an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with no power connectors, while the R7 M465 has no TDP listed. The MX230 uses a PCIe 3.0 x4 interface; the R7 M465 uses PCIe 3.0 x8. API support favors NVIDIA on Vulkan (1.4 vs 1.2.170) and DirectX (12_1 vs 12_0), while both support OpenGL 4.6. FP16 performance is dramatically different: the R7 M465 delivers 786.4 GFLOPS (1:1 ratio with FP32), while the MX230 delivers just 12.25 GFLOPS (1:64 ratio), meaning AMD is far ahead on half-precision compute.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in OpenCL?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 M465, scoring 5841 in Geekbench OpenCL versus 5739 for the NVIDIA GeForce MX230, a delta of -1.7% from the NVIDIA part’s perspective.

Q: Does the NVIDIA GeForce MX230 support Vulkan?

A: Yes, it supports Vulkan 1.4 and has a Geekbench Vulkan score of 6414. The AMD Radeon R7 M465 supports Vulkan 1.2.170 but has no recorded Vulkan benchmark score.

Q: How do their memory bandwidths compare?

A: The MX230 offers 48.06 GB/s from its 1502 MHz GDDR5 memory, while the R7 M465 offers 36.00 GB/s from its 1125 MHz GDDR5 memory. Both use 2 GB on a 64-bit bus.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 M465 has 384 shading units, compared to 256 for the NVIDIA GeForce MX230. However, the MX230’s higher clocks (1519 MHz base vs 730 MHz base) bring FP32 performance nearly level.

Q: What is the process node difference?

A: The MX230 is built on Samsung’s 14 nm process with 1,800 million transistors on a 74 mm² die. The R7 M465 is built on TSMC’s 28 nm process with 1,550 million transistors on a 125 mm² die.

Q: Which GPU has higher pixel fill rate?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce MX230, at 24.50 GPixel/s, versus 8.192 GPixel/s for the AMD Radeon R7 M465. This is due to the MX230’s 16 ROPs versus the R7 M465’s 8 ROPs.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon R7 M465 wins in OpenCL compute performance, the only direct benchmark comparison available. Its 5841 score edges out the MX230’s 5739 by 1.7%. It also has a decisive advantage in FP16 throughput, delivering 786.4 GFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, versus the MX230’s 12.25 GFLOPS at a 1:64 ratio. For any workload that leverages half-precision math, the R7 M465 is dramatically superior. It also has more shading units (384 vs 256) and more TMUs (24 vs 16), which can help in certain shader-heavy or texture-heavy scenarios, though its lower clocks and memory bandwidth temper that advantage.

The NVIDIA GeForce MX230 wins in several areas that matter for real-world laptop use. Its average benchmark score of 6077 is higher than the R7 M465’s 5841, driven by a strong Vulkan result of 6414. It has 33% more memory bandwidth (48.06 GB/s vs 36.00 GB/s), which benefits many gaming and compute workloads. Its pixel rate is three times higher (24.50 GPixel/s vs 8.192 GPixel/s), making it better for fill-rate-bound scenarios like high-resolution rendering. It supports newer API versions (DirectX 12_1 vs 12_0, Vulkan 1.4 vs 1.2.170). Crucially, it draws only 10 W TDP versus no listed TDP for the AMD part, and it is built on a far more efficient 14 nm process, making it the clear choice for battery-powered systems. The MX230 also has a smaller die (74 mm² vs 125 mm²) despite packing more transistors, indicating a more compact and efficient design.

For a user deciding between two systems, the choice comes down to workload. If the priority is OpenCL compute or FP16 performance, the R7 M465 is the pick. If the priority is Vulkan support, memory bandwidth, pixel fill rate, or power efficiency, the MX230 is the better buy. The data does not support declaring an overall winner — it supports matching the GPU to the task.