AMD Radeon R9 M375X vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M Comparison

AMD Radeon R9 M375X and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M are both end-of-life mobile graphics processors, but they represent different design philosophies and performance tiers. The recorded data shows a single head-to-head benchmark result, with the AMD part taking the victory, yet the surrounding specifications reveal a more nuanced story about how each GPU approaches its work. The R9 M375X, built on a newer 28 nm process, achieves its score through higher clock speeds and a wider compute-oriented architecture, while the GTX 675M, a larger and older 40 nm design, relies on a wider memory bus and more texture units to deliver its performance. This analysis breaks down where each part wins, what the architectural differences imply, and what the benchmark data actually says.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark results are unambiguous in one regard: the AMD Radeon R9 M375X wins the only recorded head-to-head test. In Geekbench OpenCL, the R9 M375X scores 8273 against the GTX 675M's 6946, a delta of 19.1% in favor of the AMD part. This is a substantial margin, indicating that in compute-heavy workloads, the R9 M375X is clearly ahead.

However, the GTX 675M does not lack areas of strength, even if they are not directly measured in the head-to-head data. The NVIDIA part has a 256 bit memory bus versus the AMD part's 128 bit bus, and it delivers 96.00 GB/s of bandwidth compared to 72.00 GB/s. This suggests that in memory-bandwidth-bound scenarios, such as high-resolution texture streaming or certain gaming workloads, the GTX 675M could hold an advantage, despite its lower raw compute score.

The R9 M375X wins on raw compute throughput. Its FP32 rating of 1,299.2 GFLOPS easily surpasses the GTX 675M's 952.3 GFLOPS. Similarly, the AMD part's pixel rate of 16.24 GPixel/s is much higher than the NVIDIA part's 9.920 GPixel/s. These numbers indicate that the R9 M375X is the stronger choice for tasks that stress shader math and fill-rate-bound rendering, while the GTX 675M's wider memory interface could be its saving grace in bandwidth-sensitive tests that are absent from the recorded data.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations and process nodes. The AMD Radeon R9 M375X uses the Tropo chip based on GCN 1.0 architecture, manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC. In contrast, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M uses the GF114 chip based on Fermi 2.0 architecture, also built by TSMC but on an older 40 nm process. This process gap is significant: the R9 M375X packs 1,500 million transistors into a 123 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 12.2M per mm², while the GTX 675M uses 1,950 million transistors across a much larger 332 mm² die, with a density of only 5.9M per mm².

The core configurations differ markedly. The R9 M375X has 640 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 16 raster operation pipelines. The GTX 675M has fewer shading units at 384, but more TMUs at 64 and double the ROPs at 32. This configuration suggests that NVIDIA's part was designed for more parallel texture fetching and pixel output, while AMD's part focuses on a larger pool of shader cores for general compute.

Memory subsystems also diverge. Both have 2 GB of GDDR5, but the R9 M375X uses a 128 bit bus with memory clocked at 1125 MHz, resulting in 4.5 Gbps effective and 72.00 GB/s bandwidth. The GTX 675M uses a 256 bit bus with memory at 750 MHz, yielding 3 Gbps effective and 96.00 GB/s bandwidth. The AMD part compensates with faster memory clock speeds, but the NVIDIA part wins on sheer bus width.

Feature support shows generational differences. The R9 M375X supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The GTX 675M supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but has no Vulkan support listed. This means the AMD part is more future-proof for modern API-based workloads. The R9 M375X uses a PCIe 3.0 x16 interface, while the GTX 675M uses an MXM-B (3.0) interface, reflecting its laptop-oriented design. The GTX 675M has a listed TDP of 100 W and uses an MXM module form factor, whereas the R9 M375X has no TDP or slot width listed, suggesting it may be a more power-efficient design given its newer process node.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only recorded head-to-head benchmark is Geekbench OpenCL, and the results are clear. The AMD Radeon R9 M375X scores 8273, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M scores 6946. This gives the AMD part a 19.1% advantage. In practical terms, this means the R9 M375X is nearly a fifth faster than the GTX 675M in OpenCL compute tasks, which include general-purpose GPU acceleration, physics simulations, and certain rendering workflows.

Looking at the broader benchmark context, the R9 M375X also has a Geekbench Vulkan score of 8377, which is even higher than its OpenCL result. The GTX 675M has no Vulkan score recorded, so no comparison is possible there, but the R9 M375X's Vulkan support and strong score indicate it is capable of leveraging modern graphics APIs effectively.

The average benchmark score for the R9 M375X is 8325, which is 19.9% above the GTX 675M's average of 6946. This gap is consistent with the head-to-head result, suggesting that the R9 M375X is the faster part across the board in the measured metrics. The percentile rankings reinforce this: the R9 M375X sits at the 43rd percentile among all GPUs, while the GTX 675M sits at the 39th percentile.

The nearest rival data for each part provides additional context. The R9 M375X's closest competitor is the NVIDIA Quadro K1200 with an average score of 8265, a delta of just 0.7%, meaning the R9 M375X is essentially tied with that workstation card. It is 1.2% behind the GeForce GTX 675MX and 1.3% behind the AMD Radeon 880M, but 1.6% ahead of the GeForce MX330. The GTX 675M, on the other hand, is 0.4% behind the AMD Radeon R5 M240, 1.1% behind the GeForce GTX 680M, 1.3% behind the NVIDIA T600, and 1.7% ahead of the AMD FirePro M5100. This shows that the R9 M375X competes in a slightly higher performance bracket than the GTX 675M, whose rivals are generally lower-scoring parts.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in the recorded benchmark?

A: The AMD Radeon R9 M375X is faster. In Geekbench OpenCL, it scores 8273 against the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M's 6946, a 19.1% lead for the AMD part.

Q: Does the NVIDIA GPU have any advantages in the data?

A: Yes, the GTX 675M has a wider 256 bit memory bus compared to the R9 M375X's 128 bit bus, and it delivers higher memory bandwidth at 96.00 GB/s versus 72.00 GB/s. It also has more texture units (64 vs 40) and more ROPs (32 vs 16).

Q: What is the architectural generation difference?

A: The R9 M375X uses GCN 1.0 architecture on a 28 nm process, while the GTX 675M uses Fermi 2.0 on a 40 nm process. The R9 M375X has a much higher transistor density at 12.2M per mm² versus 5.9M per mm².

Q: Does the R9 M375X support modern graphics APIs?

A: Yes, it supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The GTX 675M supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but has no Vulkan support listed.

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

A: The R9 M375X is within 1.6% of all its listed nearest rivals, ranging from 0.7% ahead of the Quadro K1200 to 1.6% behind the GeForce MX330. The GTX 675M ranges from 1.7% ahead of the FirePro M5100 to 1.3% behind the NVIDIA T600.

Q: Which GPU has the higher raw compute throughput?

A: The R9 M375X has significantly higher FP32 performance at 1,299.2 GFLOPS compared to the GTX 675M's 952.3 GFLOPS. Its pixel rate is also higher at 16.24 GPixel/s versus 9.920 GPixel/s.

The Verdict

The data points to the AMD Radeon R9 M375X as the stronger performer overall. Its 19.1% lead in the only head-to-head benchmark, combined with a higher average benchmark score (8325 vs 6946) and a better percentile ranking (43rd vs 39th), makes it the clear choice for compute-oriented tasks. The R9 M375X's modern architecture, with GCN 1.0 on 28 nm, delivers higher clock speeds (925 MHz base, 1015 MHz boost) and more shading units (640 vs 384), which translate into superior shader math and fill rates.

However, the GTX 675M is not without merit. Its 256 bit memory bus and 96.00 GB/s bandwidth suggest it could outperform the R9 M375X in bandwidth-limited scenarios, such as high-resolution texture loading or certain gaming workloads that are not covered in the recorded benchmarks. Its larger transistor count (1,950 million) and bigger die (332 mm²) indicate a more physically substantial chip, though this comes with a higher TDP of 100 W.

For users who prioritize compute performance, modern API support (including Vulkan), and efficiency, the R9 M375X is the better pick based on the data. For those who might value memory bandwidth and texture throughput, the GTX 675M has theoretical advantages, but the lack of a benchmark showing that advantage means it remains speculative. The recorded evidence favors the AMD part.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon R9 M375X | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M |

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

| Chip | Tropo | GF114 |

| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Fermi 2.0 |

| Generation | Gem System (R9 M300) | GeForce 600M |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 40 nm |

| Transistors | 1,500 million | 1,950 million |

| Die Size | 123 mm² | 332 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 12.2M / mm² | 5.9M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 925 MHz | Not listed |

| Boost Clock | 1015 MHz | Not listed |

| Memory Clock | 1125 MHz (4.5 Gbps effective) | 750 MHz (3 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 72.00 GB/s | 96.00 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 640 | 384 |

| Texture Mapping Units | 40 | 64 |

| Raster Operation Pipelines | 16 | 32 |

| Pixel Rate | 16.24 GPixel/s | 9.920 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 40.60 GTexel/s | 39.68 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 1,299.2 GFLOPS | 952.3 GFLOPS |

| TDP | Not listed | 100 W |

| Slot Width | Not listed | MXM Module |

| Power Connectors | Not listed | None |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | MXM-B (3.0) |

| Display Outputs | Not listed | Portable Device Dependent |

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

| Vulkan Support | 1.2.170 | Not listed |

| Release Date | 2015-05-04 | 2012-03-21 |

| Predecessor | Solar System | GeForce 500M |

| Successor | Polaris Mobile | GeForce 700M |