AMD Radeon R9 M275X vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 465 Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon R9 M275X has an average benchmark score of 10582, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 465 scores 9294. The R9 M275X sits in the 49th percentile of all GPUs, compared to the GTX 465's 46th percentile.

Q: How do these cards compare in raw compute performance?

A: The AMD Radeon R9 M275X delivers 1,184.0 GFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 465 provides 855.4 GFLOPS. This gives the AMD part a substantial lead in floating-point throughput.

Q: What are the memory specifications for each card?

A: The R9 M275X has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 72.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The GTX 465 has 1024 MB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 102.7 GB/s of bandwidth. The NVIDIA card has a wider bus and higher bandwidth, but less total memory.

Q: Do both cards support DirectX 12?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12, but with different feature levels. The R9 M275X supports DirectX 12 (11_1), while the GTX 465 supports DirectX 12 (11_0). The AMD card has a slightly higher feature level.

Q: What is the process node and transistor count for each GPU?

A: The R9 M275X is built on a 28 nm process with 1,500 million transistors on a 123 mm² die. The GTX 465 uses a 40 nm process with 3,100 million transistors on a 529 mm² die. The AMD chip achieves a much higher transistor density of 12.2M per mm² versus 5.9M per mm².

Q: Which card has more shading units and texture mapping units?

A: The R9 M275X has 640 shading units and 40 TMUs. The GTX 465 has 352 shading units and 44 TMUs. AMD leads in shader count, while NVIDIA has a slight edge in TMUs.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear winner for most use cases: the AMD Radeon R9 M275X. Its average benchmark score of 10582 versus 9294 for the GTX 465 represents a meaningful performance gap, and it wins the only direct head-to-head benchmark in the database by 20.5%. The R9 M275X also offers double the memory capacity at 2 GB versus 1024 MB, which matters for modern workloads and higher resolutions.

However, the GTX 465 is not without its own strengths. It provides 102.7 GB/s of memory bandwidth versus 72.00 GB/s for the AMD card, and it has a wider 256-bit memory bus. The NVIDIA card also has 32 ROPs compared to 16 on the AMD part, which can help in certain pixel-heavy scenarios. The GTX 465 supports Vulkan? No, it does not. The R9 M275X supports Vulkan 1.2.170, while the GTX 465 has no Vulkan support listed.

For a builder choosing between these two end-of-life cards, the R9 M275X is the safer pick for general compute and modern API support. The GTX 465 makes sense only if the workload is heavily dependent on memory bandwidth or if the system already has the power delivery to handle its 200 W TDP. The R9 M275X has no listed TDP, which suggests it is a more power-efficient mobile-derived part.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains one direct head-to-head benchmark between these two GPUs: Geekbench OpenCL. The AMD Radeon R9 M275X scores 11200, and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 465 scores 9294. That is a 20.5% advantage for the AMD card. This is a substantial margin, placing the R9 M275X comfortably ahead in compute workloads measured by OpenCL.

Looking at the nearest rivals for each card provides additional context. The R9 M275X's average score of 10582 puts it within striking distance of the AMD Radeon RX 6600S (10629, only 0.4% behind), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti (10690, 1% behind), and the NVIDIA Quadro K2200 (10761, 1.7% behind). It also sits slightly ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 550X (10481, 1% ahead). The GTX 465's average score of 9294 places it near the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M (9302, 0.1% behind), the AMD Radeon R7 M380 (9313, 0.2% behind), and slightly ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 (9273, 0.2% ahead) and the AMD Radeon Vega 8 (9221, 0.8% ahead).

The gap between the two cards in the head-to-head test is larger than the gap between their average scores would suggest. The R9 M275X's OpenCL score of 11200 exceeds its own average of 10582, while the GTX 465's OpenCL score of 9294 matches its average exactly. This indicates the AMD card performs particularly well in OpenCL workloads relative to its overall standing.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every major specification category. The R9 M275X uses a 28 nm process node, while the GTX 465 uses a 40 nm node. Transistor counts are reversed in scale: the GTX 465 packs 3,100 million transistors on a 529 mm² die, while the R9 M275X has 1,500 million transistors on just 123 mm². This results in a transistor density of 12.2M per mm² for AMD versus 5.9M per mm² for NVIDIA.

Clock speeds differ significantly. The R9 M275X has a base clock of 900 MHz and a boost clock of 925 MHz. The GTX 465 has no base or boost clock listed. Memory clocks also differ: the R9 M275X runs at 1125 MHz with 4.5 Gbps effective, while the GTX 465 runs at 802 MHz with 3.2 Gbps effective.

Memory configurations are notably different. The R9 M275X has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 72.00 GB/s bandwidth. The GTX 465 has 1024 MB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 102.7 GB/s bandwidth. The NVIDIA card has a 256-bit bus and higher bandwidth, but half the capacity.

Compute resources also differ. The R9 M275X has 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The GTX 465 has 352 shading units, 44 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. Pixel rates are close: 14.80 GPixel/s for AMD versus 13.38 GPixel/s for NVIDIA. Texture rates favor the AMD card: 37.00 GTexel/s versus 26.75 GTexel/s.

The GTX 465 carries a 200 W TDP, is dual-slot, requires 2x 6-pin power connectors, and has a suggested PSU of 550 W. It is 241 mm (9.5 inches) long. The R9 M275X has no TDP, slot width, power connector, or dimension data listed. The GTX 465 uses PCIe 2.0 x16, while the R9 M275X uses PCIe 3.0 x16. Display outputs are only listed for the GTX 465: 2x DVI and 1x mini-HDMI 1.3a.

Architecture Differences

The architectural split is stark. The R9 M275X is built on AMD's GCN 1.0 architecture with the Venus chip, part of the Gem System (R9 M200) generation. The GTX 465 uses NVIDIA's Fermi architecture with the GF100 chip, part of the GeForce 400 generation. Both are manufactured by TSMC, but at different process nodes: 28 nm for AMD and 40 nm for NVIDIA.

The R9 M275X supports a broader set of modern APIs. It lists DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The GTX 465 supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but has no Vulkan support listed. This gives the AMD card a clear advantage for users who need Vulkan compatibility.

The GTX 465's Fermi architecture uses a much larger die at 529 mm² and consumes 200 W, reflecting its older 40 nm manufacturing process. The R9 M275X's GCN 1.0 design on 28 nm achieves higher clock speeds (900 MHz base, 925 MHz boost) and higher FP32 throughput (1,184.0 GFLOPS versus 855.4 GFLOPS) while presumably drawing less power, though no TDP is listed for the AMD card.

The R9 M275X has a newer bus interface (PCIe 3.0 x16 versus PCIe 2.0 x16), which can matter for data transfer in bandwidth-sensitive tasks. The GTX 465's Fermi architecture was designed for a different era: it has no boost clock mechanism listed, while the R9 M275X includes boost functionality.

Where Each One Wins

AMD Radeon R9 M275X wins in compute-heavy workloads. The 20.5% head-to-head OpenCL victory is the most direct evidence. Its 1,184.0 GFLOPS FP32 throughput versus 855.4 GFLOPS for the GTX 465 means the AMD card handles general-purpose compute tasks, shader-heavy rendering, and FP32 workloads with a clear margin. The 2 GB memory capacity also gives it more headroom for larger datasets and modern game textures.

AMD Radeon R9 M275X wins in modern API support. Vulkan 1.2.170 support puts it ahead of the GTX 465, which has no Vulkan support listed. For users running Vulkan-based games or applications, the R9 M275X is the only viable option between these two. Its DirectX 12 (11_1) feature level also edges out the GTX 465's DirectX 12 (11_0).

AMD Radeon R9 M275X wins in texture throughput. At 37.00 GTexel/s versus 26.75 GTexel/s, the AMD card processes textures faster. Its pixel rate of 14.80 GPixel/s also slightly exceeds the GTX 465's 13.38 GPixel/s.

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 465 wins in memory bandwidth. With 102.7 GB/s versus 72.00 GB/s, the GTX 465 has 42% more bandwidth. This matters for workloads that are bandwidth-bound rather than compute-bound, such as certain types of image processing, video encoding, or large buffer operations. Its 256-bit bus provides a wider path for data movement.

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 465 wins in ROP throughput. With 32 ROPs versus 16, the NVIDIA card can handle more pixel output operations per clock. This can benefit certain rasterization-heavy scenes, though its lower pixel rate (13.38 GPixel/s versus 14.80 GPixel/s) means this advantage does not translate to a win in overall pixel throughput.

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 465 wins in TMU count. At 44 TMUs versus 40, the NVIDIA card has 10% more texture mapping units. However, the AMD card's higher clock speeds result in a higher texture rate overall, so this specification advantage does not produce a benchmark win.

For a practical recommendation: the R9 M275X is the better all-around card based on the recorded data. The GTX 465 is a niche choice for users who specifically need higher memory bandwidth and have the power delivery to support a 200 W GPU with a 550 W suggested PSU.