AMD Radeon RX 560 vs NVIDIA GeForce 830M Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon RX 560 and NVIDIA GeForce 830M occupy very different corners of the graphics landscape, and the data reflects that clearly. The RX 560 is a desktop-oriented part built for sustained performance, while the 830M is a mobile integrated-class solution designed for basic acceleration. In the single head-to-head test available for both parts, Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 560 dominates with a score of 16472 against the 830M's 4324. That is a 280.9% advantage, which translates to roughly 3.8 times the compute throughput. For any workload that leans on OpenCL, whether it is video encoding, physics simulation, or general GPU compute, the RX 560 is the decisive winner.

The 830M does not win any recorded benchmark in the database, but its role is different. It appears in the Geekbench Vulkan test with a score of 3590, a result the RX 560 does not have recorded. This suggests the 830M can handle Vulkan API workloads, but the absence of a comparable RX 560 score means no direct comparison is possible. In practical terms, the 830M targets lightweight, portable systems where power draw and thermal output are more important than raw performance. Its 33 W TDP and IGP slot width make it suitable for thin laptops, whereas the RX 560's 75 W TDP and dual-slot design demand a desktop chassis with dedicated cooling.

The PassMark suite provides additional context for the RX 560. It scores 3671 in PassMark G3D, 1437 in GPU compute, and 57 in DirectX 9. The 830M has no PassMark entries in the database, so these results only serve to characterize the RX 560's strengths. The DirectX 9 score of 57 is notably higher than the DirectX 11 score of 25 and DirectX 12 score of 21, indicating the RX 560's architecture is particularly well-suited to legacy API workloads. The G2D score of 485 points to competent 2D acceleration as well. For users prioritizing gaming or compute on a desktop, the RX 560 is the only sensible choice between these two.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is substantial. The RX 560 uses AMD's Polaris 21 chip, built on GCN 4.0 architecture, fabricated on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The 830M uses NVIDIA's GM108 chip, based on the Maxwell architecture, on a 28 nm process at TSMC. The process node difference alone gives the RX 560 a density advantage: 24.4 million transistors per square millimeter versus 13.2 million for the 830M. The RX 560 packs 3,000 million transistors on a 123 mm² die, while the 830M fits 1,020 million transistors on a 77 mm² die. That larger, denser chip translates directly into more compute resources.

The RX 560 fields 1024 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 16 render output units. The 830M has 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. This 4:1 ratio in shader count is the primary driver of the performance gap. Clock speeds also favor the RX 560: its base clock is 1175 MHz with a boost of 1275 MHz, compared to the 830M's 1082 MHz base and 1150 MHz boost. Memory configurations are equally divergent. The RX 560 uses 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, yielding 112.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The 830M uses 2 GB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus, yielding just 14.40 GB/s. That is a 7.8 times bandwidth deficit for the 830M, which cripples memory-intensive workloads.

Both parts support PCIe 3.0 x8, a common interface for their respective classes. The RX 560's display outputs include 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0b, and 1x DisplayPort 1.4a, while the 830M's outputs are listed as "Portable Device Dependent," reflecting its laptop-only integration. The RX 560 supports DirectX 12_0, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The 830M supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Vulkan version difference is interesting: the 830M supports a newer Vulkan revision despite being an older, smaller chip. The RX 560 also offers FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, both at 2.611 TFLOPS, whereas the 830M's FP16 capability is not recorded.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison in the database is Geekbench OpenCL. The RX 560 scores 16472, and the 830M scores 4324. The delta is 280.9%, meaning the RX 560 is nearly four times faster. This is not a marginal victory; it is a generational and class-based gap. The RX 560's 1024 shaders and 112 GB/s bandwidth simply overwhelm the 830M's 256 shaders and 14.4 GB/s bandwidth. In compute tasks that scale with shader count and memory throughput, the RX 560's lead will widen further.

The 830M does have a Geekbench Vulkan score of 3590, which is its only other recorded benchmark. The RX 560 does not have a Vulkan score in the database, so no delta can be computed. However, given the OpenCL result, it is reasonable to infer the RX 560 would also lead in Vulkan, though the 830M's newer Vulkan 1.4 API support could offer better feature coverage. The RX 560's PassMark results are extensive: G3D at 3671, GPU compute at 1437, DirectX 9 at 57, DirectX 11 at 25, DirectX 12 at 21, and G2D at 485. These scores are not directly comparable to the 830M, which has no PassMark entries, but they paint a picture of a GPU that handles legacy DirectX workloads exceptionally well relative to its modern API performance.

The average benchmark scores also tell a story. The RX 560 averages 4569 across its recorded tests, while the 830M averages 3957. The RX 560 sits at the 26th percentile of all GPUs, and the 830M sits at the 24th percentile. These percentile ranks are close, but the average scores differ by 612 points, or about 15.5%. The RX 560's nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon R5 M230 (4577, -0.2%), Intel HD Graphics P530 (4560, 0.2%), NVIDIA Quadro M3000M (4621, -1.1%), and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M (4628, -1.3%). The 830M's nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon R5 M420 (3956, 0%), NVIDIA GeForce GT 745M (3953, 0.1%), NVIDIA Quadro K2000 (3964, -0.2%), and AMD Radeon HD 6850 X2 (3977, -0.5%). These clusters show that the RX 560 competes in a higher performance tier, despite its modest percentile ranking.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in OpenCL compute?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 560 is significantly faster. It scores 16472 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the NVIDIA GeForce 830M scores 4324, a 280.9% advantage for the RX 560.

Q: Does the NVIDIA GeForce 830M support Vulkan?

A: Yes. The 830M has a Geekbench Vulkan score of 3590. It supports Vulkan 1.4, which is a newer API version than the RX 560's Vulkan 1.3 support.

Q: How do their memory configurations compare?

A: The RX 560 has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 112.0 GB/s bandwidth. The 830M has 2 GB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus with 14.40 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 560 offers nearly eight times the memory bandwidth.

Q: What are the power requirements for each GPU?

A: The RX 560 has a 75 W TDP and requires a 250 W power supply, using no external power connectors. The 830M has a 33 W TDP and also uses no power connectors, but it is an integrated-class part for portable devices.

Q: Which GPU is better for desktop gaming?

A: The RX 560 is designed for desktop use with dual-slot cooling and dedicated display outputs. Its PassMark G3D score of 3671 and higher shader count make it far more capable for gaming, though the 830M's low power draw suits it only for light mobile workloads.

Q: How do their transistor counts and die sizes differ?

A: The RX 560 has 3,000 million transistors on a 123 mm² die using a 14 nm process. The 830M has 1,020 million transistors on a 77 mm² die using a 28 nm process. The RX 560 has a higher transistor density at 24.4M per mm² versus 13.2M per mm².

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon RX 560 | NVIDIA GeForce 830M |

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

| Chip | Polaris 21 | GM108 |

| Architecture | GCN 4.0 | Maxwell |

| Process Node | 14 nm | 28 nm |

| Foundry | GlobalFoundries | TSMC |

| Transistors | 3,000 million | 1,020 million |

| Die Size | 123 mm² | 77 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 24.4M / mm² | 13.2M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1175 MHz | 1082 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1275 MHz | 1150 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1750 MHz, 7 Gbps effective | 900 MHz, 1800 Mbps effective |

| Memory Size | 4 GB | 2 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | DDR3 |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 64 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 112.0 GB/s | 14.40 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 1024 | 256 |

| TMUs | 64 | 16 |

| ROPs | 16 | 8 |

| Pixel Rate | 20.40 GPixel/s | 9.200 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 81.60 GTexel/s | 18.40 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 2.611 TFLOPS | 588.8 GFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 2.611 TFLOPS (1:1) | Not recorded |

| TDP | 75 W | 33 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | IGP |

| Suggested PSU | 250 W | Not specified |

| Display Outputs | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0b, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a | Portable Device Dependent |

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

| Vulkan Support | 1.3 | 1.4 |

| Release Date | 2017-04-17 | 2014-03-11 |

| Predecessor | Arctic Islands | GeForce 700M |

| Successor | Vega | GeForce 900M |

| Launch MSRP | 99 USD | Not recorded |

The RX 560's launch MSRP was 99 USD. The 830M has no recorded launch MSRP. Both parts are end-of-life. The RX 560 is a desktop card with a 170 mm length (6.7 inches), while the 830M has no recorded dimensions, consistent with its integration into portable devices. The RX 560's higher pixel rate of 20.40 GPixel/s and texture rate of 81.60 GTexel/s dwarf the 830M's 9.200 GPixel/s and 18.40 GTexel/s, reinforcing the performance hierarchy established across every measurable metric.