AMD Radeon RX 560 vs NVIDIA GeForce 930M Comparison

AMD Radeon RX 560 vs NVIDIA GeForce 930M: Benchmark Analysis

The AMD Radeon RX 560 and NVIDIA GeForce 930M represent two very different approaches to mobile and small-form-factor graphics, separated by two years of silicon evolution and targeting distinct performance tiers. The data shows a decisive overall winner, but the comparison reveals important architectural and generational lessons. The RX 560 holds an average benchmark score of 4569 against the 930M’s 4388, a modest 4.1% gap in aggregate, yet the head-to-head compute test tells a far more dramatic story. Both GPUs sit at the 26th percentile among all GPUs, indicating they occupy a similar low-to-mid-range position in the overall performance landscape despite their disparate specifications.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only directly comparable benchmark in the data is Geekbench OpenCL, and the results are lopsided. The AMD Radeon RX 560 scores 16472, while the NVIDIA GeForce 930M manages just 5046. This represents a 226.4% advantage for the RX 560 — meaning the AMD part delivers more than three times the compute throughput of the 930M in this workload. The delta is so large that it underscores fundamental differences in raw compute resources rather than mere clock speed tweaks.

For context, the RX 560’s nearest rivals in the aggregate database include the AMD Radeon R5 M230 (average score 4577, just 0.2% higher), the Intel HD Graphics P530 (4560, 0.2% lower), and the NVIDIA Quadro M3000M (4621, 1.1% lower). The 930M’s rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GT 645M (4411, 0.5% lower), the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200 (4360, 0.7% higher), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 GDDR6 (4335, 1.2% higher). This places both GPUs in a crowded field of similar-performance parts, yet their individual strengths and weaknesses diverge sharply.

The single head-to-head result is the only direct comparison available, and it favors AMD overwhelmingly. In OpenCL — a compute-heavy API used for general-purpose GPU workloads — the RX 560’s 1024 shading units and 2.611 TFLOPS FP32 throughput dwarf the 930M’s 384 shading units and 421.6 GFLOPS. The 930M has no Geekbench Metal score, while the RX 560 posts 18941 in that test, further indicating the AMD part’s compute capability. The 930M does show a Geekbench Vulkan score of 3729, a test the RX 560 lacks, but that does not offset the OpenCL gap.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gulf between these two GPUs is vast and explains the benchmark disparity. The RX 560 uses the Polaris 21 chip built on GCN 4.0 architecture, fabricated on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It packs 3,000 million transistors into a 123 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 24.4 million per square millimeter. The 930M, by contrast, uses the GM108S chip based on NVIDIA’s Maxwell architecture, manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It contains 1,020 million transistors on a 77 mm² die, for a density of 13.2 million per square millimeter. The newer 14 nm node gives AMD a clear density advantage, but the 930M’s simpler design still achieves reasonable efficiency for its era.

Compute resources follow the transistor budget. The RX 560 fields 1024 shading units, 64 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 16 raster output units (ROPs). The 930M offers 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. These numbers translate directly to pixel and texture throughput: the RX 560 achieves 20.40 GPixel/s and 81.60 GTexel/s, versus the 930M’s 4.392 GPixel/s and 13.18 GTexel/s. The RX 560 also supports FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, both at 2.611 TFLOPS, while the 930M lists no FP16 capability at all.

Memory systems differ fundamentally. The RX 560 uses 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 112.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The 930M relies on 2 GB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus, providing just 12.80 GB/s — less than one-eighth the bandwidth. Memory clocks tell the same story: the RX 560 runs at 1750 MHz (7 Gbps effective), while the 930M runs at 800 MHz (1600 Mbps effective). The RX 560’s 128-bit bus combined with faster GDDR5 makes it far more capable of feeding its shading units, which is critical for modern game textures and compute workloads.

Power and physical design also diverge. The RX 560 carries a 75 W TDP, uses a dual-slot cooler, and requires a 250 W power supply recommendation; it draws power solely from the PCIe slot with no external connectors. The 930M is rated at just 33 W TDP, is an integrated-style IGP (integrated graphics processor) with no slot width specification, and has no suggested PSU — it is designed for portable devices where power is at a premium. The RX 560 measures 170 mm (6.7 inches) in length, while the 930M has no listed dimensions, consistent with its mobile-oriented design.

API support also differs. The RX 560 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The 930M supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 — a newer Vulkan version but an older DirectX feature level. Both support PCIe 3.0 x8, so host interface bandwidth is identical.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in OpenCL compute benchmarks?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 560 scores 16472 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 226.4% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce 930M’s 5046. The RX 560’s 2.611 TFLOPS FP32 throughput and 1024 shading units give it a massive compute advantage.

Q: How do their memory subsystems compare?

A: The RX 560 has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 112.0 GB/s bandwidth. The 930M has 2 GB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus with just 12.80 GB/s. The RX 560’s memory clock runs at 7 Gbps effective versus the 930M’s 1600 Mbps effective.

Q: Are these GPUs comparable in overall performance ranking?

A: Both sit at the 26th percentile among all GPUs. The RX 560’s average benchmark score is 4569, while the 930M’s is 4388. Their nearest rivals include parts like the AMD Radeon R5 M230 (4577) for the RX 560 and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 645M (4411) for the 930M.

Q: What are the power requirements for each?

A: The RX 560 has a 75 W TDP and a recommended 250 W system power supply. The 930M has a 33 W TDP and no suggested PSU, reflecting its design for portable devices.

Q: Which GPU supports newer graphics APIs?

A: The RX 560 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The 930M supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The RX 560 has a higher DirectX feature level, while the 930M has a newer Vulkan version.

Q: What physical form factors do they use?

A: The RX 560 is a dual-slot card measuring 170 mm (6.7 inches), with no power connectors required. The 930M is an IGP with no slot width or dimensions listed, designed for direct integration into portable devices.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon RX 560 | NVIDIA GeForce 930M |

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

| Chip | Polaris 21 | GM108S |

| Architecture | GCN 4.0 | Maxwell |

| Generation | Polaris (RX 500) | GeForce 900M |

| 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 | 549 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1275 MHz | 549 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1750 MHz (7 Gbps effective) | 800 MHz (1600 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 | 12.80 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 1024 | 384 |

| TMUs | 64 | 24 |

| ROPs | 16 | 8 |

| Pixel Rate | 20.40 GPixel/s | 4.392 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 81.60 GTexel/s | 13.18 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 2.611 TFLOPS | 421.6 GFLOPS |

| FP16 | 2.611 TFLOPS (1:1) | null |

| TDP | 75 W | 33 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | IGP |

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

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

| Vulkan | 1.3 | 1.4 |

| Release Date | 2017-04-17 | 2015-03-12 |

| Successor | Vega | GeForce 10 Mobile |

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon RX 560 wins decisively in raw compute performance. Its 226.4% OpenCL advantage over the 930M is the single largest differentiator in the data. For any workload that leverages general-purpose GPU compute — whether OpenCL-based rendering, physics simulation, or data processing — the RX 560 is categorically superior. Its 2.611 TFLOPS FP32 throughput, 1024 shading units, and 112.0 GB/s memory bandwidth ensure that compute-bound tasks have both the arithmetic units and the data feeding capacity they need. The RX 560 also holds the only head-to-head benchmark victory in the dataset, making it the clear choice for users who prioritize throughput over power efficiency.

The RX 560 also wins on memory capacity and bandwidth. With 4 GB of GDDR5 versus 2 GB of DDR3, the AMD part can handle larger textures and more complex scenes without hitting memory ceilings. Its 8.75x bandwidth advantage (112.0 GB/s vs 12.80 GB/s) means that even if the 930M had comparable compute cores, it would still be starved for data. The RX 560’s 128-bit bus is double the width of the 930M’s 64-bit bus, and the GDDR5 memory type operates at significantly higher effective speeds.

The NVIDIA GeForce 930M wins in power efficiency and portability. With a 33 W TDP versus the RX 560’s 75 W, the 930M consumes less than half the power. It is classified as an IGP with no slot width, making it suitable for thin-and-light laptops where space and cooling are constrained. The RX 560, by contrast, requires a dual-slot cooler and 170 mm of length, limiting it to larger chassis. The 930M also supports Vulkan 1.4, a newer version than the RX 560’s Vulkan 1.3, which may matter for certain modern titles that leverage the latest Vulkan extensions.

For gaming workloads, the RX 560’s raw advantages in pixel rate (20.40 GPixel/s vs 4.392 GPixel/s) and texture rate (81.60 GTexel/s vs 13.18 GTexel/s) make it the stronger performer for any rasterization-heavy application. The 930M’s higher DirectX feature level is 11_0, while the RX 560 reaches 12_0, meaning the AMD card can handle more advanced DirectX 12 effects. Neither GPU supports ray tracing or tensor cores, as those fields are null for both.

In aggregate, the RX 560’s average benchmark score of 4569 exceeds the 930M’s 4388 by approximately 4.1%. Yet that aggregate figure understates the compute gap because the 930M’s Vulkan score (3729) and OpenCL score (5046) are the only benchmarks it has, while the RX 560 has a broader profile including Passmark tests across DirectX 9 through 12, G2D, and G3D. The RX 560’s Passmark G3D score of 3671 and GPU compute score of 1437 provide additional evidence of its general-purpose strength.

The production status of both GPUs is end-of-life, and their release dates differ by about two years — April 2017 for the RX 560 and March 2015 for the 930M. The RX 560’s successor is Vega, while the 930M’s successor is GeForce 10 Mobile. The RX 560 launched with an MSRP of 99 USD, a fact that places it in the entry-level desktop segment, while the 930M has no listed launch MSRP, consistent with its OEM mobile integration model. For users choosing between these two in a benchmark context, the RX 560 is the clear performance leader, while the 930M’s only advantages are its lower power draw and integrated form factor.