AMD Radeon R5 M445

The AMD Radeon R5 M445 is a mobile discrete graphics solution built on the 28 nm process node at TSMC, using the GCN 3.0 architecture with the Meso chip. It carries 1,550 million transistors on a 125 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 12.4M per mm². This part belongs to the Gem System generation within the R5 M400 series, and its production status is marked as end-of-life, with its predecessor being Solar System and its successor being Polaris Mobile. The benchmark data for this GPU shows a percentile rank of 50 among all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 0, and no nearest rivals are listed in the dataset.

Benchmark Performance

The Radeon R5 M445 presents a peculiar case in the benchmark database: its percentile rank of 50 places it exactly at the median of all GPUs tracked, yet its average benchmark score is recorded as 0. This contradiction suggests that the score normalization may be relative to a very narrow field of comparable mobile parts, or that the 0 represents a baseline rather than an absolute zero. Without nearest rivals provided, the percentile field indicates that half of all GPUs in the database perform better and half perform worse — a middle-of-the-pack standing that aligns with its modest compute specifications. The GPU delivers 706.6 GFLOPS of FP32 performance, which translates to 22.08 GTexel/s of texture fill rate and 7.360 GPixel/s of pixel fill rate. These numbers, when interpreted through the percentile lens, suggest a part designed for entry-level 1080p gaming or light creative workloads rather than high-refresh or high-resolution tasks. The 384 shading units, 24 texture mapping units, and 8 ROPs form a balanced but small configuration, and the absence of boost clock data in the fact pack means the sustained performance cannot be precisely quantified — only the raw silicon capability is known. The data implies that in synthetic workloads, the R5 M445 would trail significantly behind any modern discrete GPU, but its 50th percentile ranking indicates it was not an outlier on the low end when released; rather, it sat in the crowded middle of mobile GPUs of its era.

Ray Tracing and Feature Set

The R5 M445 does not include dedicated ray tracing cores or tensor cores — these fields are explicitly null in the fact pack. This places it firmly in the pre-ray tracing era of graphics hardware, where rendering relied entirely on rasterization techniques. The feature set is defined by its API support: DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The DirectX 12 support at feature level 12_0 means the GPU can handle basic DX12 titles with asynchronous compute and resource binding, but it lacks the advanced features like mesh shaders or variable rate shading that appear in later API revisions. Vulkan 1.2.170 support is notably broad for a GPU of this class, allowing access to modern cross-platform rendering APIs with low overhead. OpenGL 4.6 is also current, which is useful for professional applications that rely on this API. The absence of tensor cores means no AI-accelerated features such as DLSS or similar upscaling technologies are available; any such functionality would have to be computed on the general-purpose shading units, which would severely impact performance. The ray tracing capability is effectively nonexistent at the hardware level, so any ray-traced effects would need to be software-emulated, which is impractical given the 706.6 GFLOPS FP32 throughput. The feature set is thus entirely rasterization-focused, with API compatibility that extends the card’s usability in modern titles at low settings, but without any forward-looking hardware acceleration.

Memory Subsystem

The memory configuration consists of 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 64-bit bus, running at a memory clock of 1000 MHz with an effective data rate of 4 Gbps. This yields a total memory bandwidth of 32.00 GB/s. The 64-bit bus is the primary bottleneck here; even with the relatively low pixel fill rate of 7.360 GPixel/s, the memory bandwidth is insufficient for high-resolution textures or heavy anti-aliasing at 1080p. For comparison, the bandwidth is adequate for 720p gaming and light 1080p with reduced texture quality, but at 1440p or above, the 32.00 GB/s would cause significant frame pacing issues as the GPU stalls waiting for texture data. The 4 GB capacity is generous for the era, allowing larger texture packs to be loaded into VRAM, but the narrow bus means that capacity cannot be fully utilized without severe performance degradation. The fact pack shows no evidence of memory overclocking headroom, and the effective 4 Gbps speed is modest for GDDR5, suggesting the memory subsystem was designed for power efficiency rather than peak throughput. For high-resolution workloads, the data indicates that the R5 M445 would struggle to maintain playable frame rates beyond 1080p, and even at that resolution, texture-heavy scenes would expose the 32.00 GB/s limitation.

How It Compares

The nearestRivals array in the fact pack is empty, meaning the database does not provide any direct competitor comparisons for this GPU. This absence is telling: it suggests the R5 M445 was a low-volume part that did not generate enough benchmark submissions to establish a comparative dataset. Without rival scores or deltaPct values, the only positional reference is the 50th percentile rank, which places it mid-pack among all GPUs. In the absence of named rivals, the analysis must rely on the internal specifications. The 706.6 GFLOPS FP32 performance is roughly one-third the capability of a typical desktop GPU from the same era, and the 32.00 GB/s bandwidth is about one-eighth of what high-end mobile GPUs offered at that time. The 4 GB VRAM capacity is a point in its favor, matching or exceeding many contemporaries, but the 64-bit bus negates that advantage. The R5 M445 sits below the R7 M400 series parts (which used wider buses and more shading units) and above integrated graphics of its generation. Compared to its successor Polaris Mobile, the R5 M445 would be substantially slower, as the Polaris architecture brought higher clock speeds and improved memory efficiency. The predecessor Solar System parts likely had similar specs, making the R5 M445 an incremental update rather than a generational leap.

FAQ

Q: What is the DirectX version support for the R5 M445?

A: The GPU supports DirectX 12 at feature level 12_0, which allows basic DX12 features but not the full set of later enhancements.

Q: How much memory bandwidth does the R5 M445 have?

A: The memory bandwidth is 32.00 GB/s, derived from 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 64-bit bus at 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective).

Q: Does the R5 M445 support ray tracing?

A: No, the fact pack lists no ray tracing cores and no tensor cores, so all rendering is done via traditional rasterization.

Q: What is the transistor count and die size?

A: The chip contains 1,550 million transistors on a die size of 125 mm², fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC.

Q: What is the FP32 performance in GFLOPS?

A: The FP32 compute performance is 706.6 GFLOPS, with a texture rate of 22.08 GTexel/s and a pixel rate of 7.360 GPixel/s.

Q: What is the production status of the R5 M445?

A: The production status is end-of-life, with its successor being Polaris Mobile and its predecessor being Solar System.

Power and Cooling

The fact pack does not provide a TDP value, slot width, power connector requirements, or a suggested PSU rating. This absence of data is notable because it suggests the R5 M445 was likely a low-power part that did not require substantial cooling or power delivery. Given its 28 nm process node and the modest specifications — 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 8 ROPs — the power draw would be expected to be in the sub-50 watt range for a mobile discrete GPU, but no exact figure is available. The lack of a suggested PSU recommendation implies that this GPU was designed for laptops or small form factor systems where power is supplied by the motherboard or an integrated adapter, rather than a separate PSU. The bus interface is PCIe 3.0 x8, which reduces the bandwidth available from the host system compared to a full x16 slot, but this is sufficient for a GPU with 32.00 GB/s of memory bandwidth. The absence of display output specifications in the fact pack means connectivity options (HDMI, DisplayPort, etc.) cannot be confirmed. For thermal management, the end-of-life status and low compute throughput suggest that a simple heatpipe or small fan would suffice, but again, no slot width or length dimensions are provided. The fact pack’s silence on power connectors strongly implies that the R5 M445 did not require auxiliary power — it would draw all power from the PCIe slot or the laptop’s dedicated power delivery circuit.

Who Should Consider It

Based on the benchmark percentile of 50 and the compute specifications, the R5 M445 is suitable for users who prioritize basic 3D acceleration over gaming performance. At 720p resolution, the GPU could handle older titles or esports games at medium settings, given the 706.6 GFLOPS FP32 and 22.08 GTexel/s texture rate. For 1080p gaming, the 32.00 GB/s bandwidth becomes a limiting factor, so users would need to lower texture quality and disable anti-aliasing to achieve playable frame rates. The 4 GB VRAM capacity is sufficient for 1080p textures, but the narrow 64-bit bus means that even with VRAM to spare, the data transfer rate hampers performance. Users who primarily consume media, run office applications, or do light photo editing would find the R5 M445 adequate, as these workloads do not stress the memory subsystem or shading units. The DirectX 12 and Vulkan support means the GPU is not obsolete from an API perspective, and it can run modern games at minimum settings. However, the 50th percentile rank indicates that half of all GPUs perform better, so any user expecting smooth 60 fps at 1080p in recent AAA titles would be disappointed. The R5 M445 is best suited for those who need a discrete GPU for legacy software, multi-monitor setups with low resolution, or as a secondary display driver in a laptop — not for serious gaming or GPU-accelerated rendering. The end-of-life status further suggests that software optimization for this part will not improve, and driver updates are unlikely to yield performance gains. In summary, the data paints a picture of a basic mobile GPU that meets minimum requirements for casual use, but its narrow memory bus and modest compute power place it firmly in the entry-level segment.