GPU Comparison

The NVIDIA T600 and AMD Radeon R5 M240 represent two very different eras of mobile and workstation graphics. The data places both in the 39th percentile of all GPUs, but a closer look at the benchmark results reveals a significant performance gap between the two, driven by fundamental architectural and specification differences.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only directly comparable benchmark in the data is Geekbench OpenCL, and the result is a decisive victory for the NVIDIA T600. The T600 scores 27,875, while the AMD Radeon R5 M240 scores 6,975. This translates to a delta of 299.6%, meaning the T600 delivers roughly four times the compute performance in this test. This is not a marginal win; it is a categorical performance tier separation.

Looking at the broader benchmark context, the T600's average benchmark score of 7,035 places it slightly ahead of the R5 M240's average of 6,975, a 0.9% difference in the T600's favor. However, this aggregate figure masks the true nature of the comparison. The T600's average is pulled down by its performance in a suite of DirectX and compute tests where it scores relatively low in isolation (e.g., Passmark DirectX 9 at 114, Passmark G2D at 756), while its Geekbench OpenCL score is a massive outlier on the high end. The R5 M240, by contrast, only has a single Geekbench OpenCL score recorded.

The T600's other benchmark results are telling. In Passmark G3D, it scores 6,479, which is a strong showing for a 40 W card. Its Passmark GPU Compute score of 2,402 further indicates a capable compute unit. The R5 M240's data does not include these tests, making a direct comparison on those workloads impossible from the provided facts.

The nearest-rival data for the T600 shows it trading blows with older high-end mobile parts: it is 0.2% ahead of the GeForce GTX 680M, 1.3% ahead of the GeForce GTX 675M, but 1.7% behind the desktop GeForce GTX 970. For the R5 M240, its rival list includes the T600 itself, where it trails by 0.8%, but it is 2.1% ahead of the AMD FirePro M5100.

Architecture Differences

The underlying hardware could not be more different. The NVIDIA T600 is built on the Turing architecture using the TU117 chip, fabricated on a 12 nm process at TSMC. This is a modern, efficient design. In contrast, the AMD Radeon R5 M240 uses the older GCN 1.0 architecture with the Jet chip, built on a 28 nm process, also at TSMC. The node shrink alone gives the T600 a substantial efficiency and density advantage.

The transistor counts illustrate this disparity. The T600 packs 4,700 million transistors into a 200 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 23.5 million per mm². The R5 M240 is a much smaller and simpler chip, with only 690 million transistors on a 56 mm² die, for a density of 12.3 million per mm². This means the T600 has nearly 7 times more transistors and manages them in a denser, more complex package.

Memory architecture is another major divider. The T600 comes with 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering a bandwidth of 160.0 GB/s. The R5 M240 has only 1 GB of DDR3 memory on a 64-bit bus, yielding a meager 14.40 GB/s of bandwidth. This is an 11x difference in memory bandwidth, which heavily impacts texture-heavy and high-resolution workloads.

The compute resources also favor the T600 significantly. The T600 has 640 shading units, 40 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 32 raster operation pipelines (ROPs). The R5 M240 has half the shading units at 320, half the TMUs at 20, and only 8 ROPs. This leads to a pixel rate of 42.72 GPixel/s for the T600 versus 8.24 GPixel/s for the R5 M240, and a texture rate of 53.40 GTexel/s versus 20.60 GTexel/s. In raw FP32 compute, the T600 delivers 1.709 TFLOPS to the R5 M240's 659.2 GFLOPS. The T600 also supports FP16 at 3.418 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, a feature the R5 M240 lacks entirely.

The T600's clock speeds are lower (base 735 MHz, boost 1335 MHz) compared to the R5 M240 (base 1000 MHz, boost 1030 MHz), but the massive architectural and memory advantages render the clock speed difference irrelevant. The T600 compensates with far more execution units and faster memory. The bus interface also differs: the T600 uses PCIe 3.0 x16, while the R5 M240 uses the narrower PCIe 3.0 x8.

The API support reflects the T600's newer design: it supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, while the R5 M240 is limited to DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170. Both support OpenGL 4.6. The T600 is a single-slot card with no power connectors and a 40 W TDP, while the R5 M240's power draw is not listed in the data. The T600 also has four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, while the R5 M240's display outputs are unspecified.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the NVIDIA T600 is the superior performer. Its 299.6% lead in Geekbench OpenCL, combined with its greater memory bandwidth, higher transistor count, and more advanced architecture, makes it a completely different class of product. The R5 M240, while in the same overall percentile rank (39th), achieves that position with a fraction of the compute resources. The T600 is a workstation-oriented card (evidenced by its Quadro generation and display outputs) that can handle modern compute and graphics tasks, whereas the R5 M240 appears to be a basic mobile part from an earlier era. If the choice is between these two, the T600 is the only rational option for any task requiring graphical or compute performance.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the NVIDIA T600 than the AMD Radeon R5 M240 in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The NVIDIA T600 scores 27,875, which is 299.6% higher than the R5 M240's score of 6,975.

Q: Do the two GPUs have the same amount of memory?

A: No. The NVIDIA T600 has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory, while the AMD Radeon R5 M240 has 1 GB of DDR3 memory.

Q: Which GPU has a higher memory bandwidth?

A: The NVIDIA T600 has a memory bandwidth of 160.0 GB/s, compared to the AMD Radeon R5 M240's 14.40 GB/s.

Q: What is the difference in their transistor counts?

A: The NVIDIA T600 has 4,700 million transistors, while the AMD Radeon R5 M240 has 690 million transistors.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon R5 M240 support FP16 compute?

A: No. The FP16 field for the R5 M240 is null, indicating no support. The NVIDIA T600 supports FP16 at 3.418 TFLOPS.

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA T600 has an average benchmark score of 7,035, which is 0.9% higher than the AMD Radeon R5 M240's average of 6,975.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA T600 wins in every measurable category in the provided data. It dominates in raw compute (Geekbench OpenCL), offers significantly more memory and bandwidth, and has a higher pixel rate and texture rate. Its only recorded loss is in a comparison against the desktop GeForce GTX 970, where it trails by 1.7% in average score. The T600's strengths suggest it is suited for professional graphics, CAD, and compute workloads where precision and memory capacity are critical.

The AMD Radeon R5 M240 has no benchmark wins in the head-to-head data. Its only relative advantage is a single data point: it is 2.1% ahead of the AMD FirePro M5100 in average score, a rival that the T600 does not directly face. The R5 M240's higher base clock speed (1000 MHz vs 735 MHz) is a specification where it leads, but this does not translate into any performance victory. It is a legacy part that is outclassed across the board by the T600.

Specification Differences

The following table highlights the specification fields where the two GPUs differ, based solely on the provided data.

| Specification | NVIDIA T600 | AMD Radeon R5 M240 |

| :--- | :--- | :--- |

| Architecture | Turing | GCN 1.0 |

| Chip | TU117 | Jet |

| Process Node | 12 nm | 28 nm |

| Transistors | 4,700 million | 690 million |

| Die Size | 200 mm² | 56 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 23.5M / mm² | 12.3M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 735 MHz | 1000 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1335 MHz | 1030 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1250 MHz (10 Gbps effective) | 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 4 GB | 1024 MB |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | DDR3 |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 64 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 160.0 GB/s | 14.40 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 640 | 320 |

| TMUs | 40 | 20 |

| ROPs | 32 | 8 |

| Pixel Rate | 42.72 GPixel/s | 8.24 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 53.40 GTexel/s | 20.60 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 1.709 TFLOPS | 659.2 GFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 3.418 TFLOPS (2:1) | null |

| TDP | 40 W | null |

| Slot Width | Single-slot | null |

| Power Connectors | None | null |

| Suggested PSU | 200 W | null |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |

| Display Outputs | 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a | null |

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

| Vulkan Support | 1.4 | 1.2.170 |

| Release Date | 2021-04-11 | 2014-09-17 |