AMD Radeon R5 M240 vs AMD Radeon HD 8750M
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon R5 M240 and AMD Radeon HD 8750M videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Technologies. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Differences
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R5 M240
- Videocard is newer: launch date 1 year(s) 6 month(s) later
- Around 61% higher core clock speed: 1000 MHz vs 620 MHz
- Around 11% higher texture fill rate: 20.6 GTexel / s vs 18.6 GTexel / s
- Around 11% better floating-point performance: 659.2 gflops vs 595.2 gflops
Launch date | 18 September 2014 vs 26 February 2013 |
Core clock speed | 1000 MHz vs 620 MHz |
Texture fill rate | 20.6 GTexel / s vs 18.6 GTexel / s |
Floating-point performance | 659.2 gflops vs 595.2 gflops |
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon HD 8750M
- Around 20% higher pipelines: 384 vs 320
- 2.2x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 1009 vs 450
- Around 28% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 203 vs 159
- Around 54% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 5747 vs 3721
- Around 54% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 2221 vs 1444
- Around 54% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 2221 vs 1444
- Around 3% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3351 vs 3249
- Around 3% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3351 vs 3249
- Around 97% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1734 vs 881
- Around 97% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1734 vs 881
Specifications (specs) | |
Pipelines | 384 vs 320 |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 1009 vs 450 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 203 vs 159 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 5747 vs 3721 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2221 vs 1444 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2221 vs 1444 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3351 vs 3249 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3351 vs 3249 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1734 vs 881 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1734 vs 881 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD Radeon R5 M240
GPU 2: AMD Radeon HD 8750M
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
Name | AMD Radeon R5 M240 | AMD Radeon HD 8750M |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 450 | 1009 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 159 | 203 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 3721 | 5747 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1444 | 2221 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1444 | 2221 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3249 | 3351 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3249 | 3351 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 881 | 1734 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 881 | 1734 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 8.274 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 271.177 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.505 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 24.834 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 70.596 | |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 |
Compare specifications (specs)
AMD Radeon R5 M240 | AMD Radeon HD 8750M | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | GCN 1.0 | GCN 1.0 |
Code name | Jet | Mars |
Design | AMD Radeon R5 200 Series | AMD Radeon HD 8000M Series |
Launch date | 18 September 2014 | 26 February 2013 |
Place in performance rating | 1297 | 1300 |
Type | Desktop | Desktop |
Technical info |
||
Core clock speed | 1000 MHz | 620 MHz |
Floating-point performance | 659.2 gflops | 595.2 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
Pipelines | 320 | 384 |
Texture fill rate | 20.6 GTexel / s | 18.6 GTexel / s |
Transistor count | 1,040 million | 1,040 million |
Boost clock speed | 775 MHz | |
Compute units | 6 | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Bus support | Not Listed | |
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |
Laptop size | medium sized | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 11 | 11 |
Mantle | ||
OpenCL | Not Listed | |
OpenGL | 4.4 | 4.4 |
Memory |
||
Memory bandwidth | 14.4 GB / s | 64 GB / s |
Memory type | Not Listed | GDDR5 |
Shared memory | 0 | 0 |
Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | |
Memory bus width | 128 Bit | |
Memory clock speed | 4000 MHz | |
Technologies |
||
AMD Eyefinity | ||
AppAcceleration | ||
DualGraphics | ||
Enduro | ||
HD3D | ||
Powerplay | ||
PowerTune | ||
Switchable graphics | ||
ZeroCore |