AMD Radeon R5 M255 vs AMD Radeon HD 6230
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon R5 M255 and AMD Radeon HD 6230 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, 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), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps).
Differences
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R5 M255
- Videocard is newer: launch date 3 year(s) 3 month(s) later
- Around 42% higher core clock speed: 925 MHz vs 650 MHz
- 4.3x more texture fill rate: 22.56 GTexel / s vs 5.2 GTexel / s
- 4x more pipelines: 320 vs 80
- 6.9x better floating-point performance: 721.9 gflops vs 104 gflops
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 28 nm vs 40 nm
- 8x more maximum memory size: 4 GB vs 512 MB
- 3x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 534 vs 179
- 5.8x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1459 vs 252
- 2.3x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1715 vs 744
- 2.6x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3357 vs 1293
- 5.8x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1459 vs 252
- 2.3x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1715 vs 744
- 2.6x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3357 vs 1293
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 12 October 2014 vs 2 July 2011 |
| Core clock speed | 925 MHz vs 650 MHz |
| Texture fill rate | 22.56 GTexel / s vs 5.2 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 320 vs 80 |
| Floating-point performance | 721.9 gflops vs 104 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm vs 40 nm |
| Maximum memory size | 4 GB vs 512 MB |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 534 vs 179 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1459 vs 252 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1715 vs 744 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3357 vs 1293 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1459 vs 252 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1715 vs 744 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3357 vs 1293 |
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon HD 6230
- Around 88% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 254 vs 135
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 254 vs 135 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD Radeon R5 M255
GPU 2: AMD Radeon HD 6230
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
| Name | AMD Radeon R5 M255 | AMD Radeon HD 6230 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 534 | 179 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 135 | 254 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 4491 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 14.288 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 166.596 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.988 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 20.164 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 66.631 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1459 | 252 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1715 | 744 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3357 | 1293 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1459 | 252 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1715 | 744 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3357 | 1293 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| AMD Radeon R5 M255 | AMD Radeon HD 6230 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | GCN 3.0 | TeraScale 2 |
| Code name | Topaz | Park |
| Design | AMD Radeon R5 200 Series | |
| Launch date | 12 October 2014 | 2 July 2011 |
| Place in performance rating | 1364 | 1368 |
| Type | Desktop | Desktop |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 940 MHz | |
| Compute units | 5 | |
| Core clock speed | 925 MHz | 650 MHz |
| Floating-point performance | 721.9 gflops | 104 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 40 nm |
| Pipelines | 320 | 80 |
| Texture fill rate | 22.56 GTexel / s | 5.2 GTexel / s |
| Transistor count | 3,100 million | 292 million |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 19 Watt | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | No outputs | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Bus support | PCIe 3.0 x8 | |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Length | 168 mm | |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 11 | 11.2 (11_0) |
| Mantle | ||
| OpenCL | Not Listed | |
| OpenGL | 4.4 | 4.4 |
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 512 MB |
| Memory bandwidth | 16 GB/s | 8 GB / s |
| Memory bus width | 64 bit | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1000 MHz | 1000 MHz |
| Memory type | DDR3 | DDR2 |
| Shared memory | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
| AMD Eyefinity | ||
| AppAcceleration | ||
| DualGraphics | ||
| Enduro | ||
| HD3D | ||
| Powerplay | ||
| PowerTune | ||
| Switchable graphics | ||
| ZeroCore | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare AMD Radeon R5 M255 with others
AMDRadeon R5 M255 vs
ATIRadeon HD 5570
AMDRadeon R5 M255 vs
NVIDIAQuadro K600
AMDRadeon R5 M255 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GT 820M
AMDRadeon R5 M255 vs
IntelHD Graphics
AMDRadeon R5 M255 vs
NVIDIAGeForce 910M
AMDRadeon R5 M255 vs
AMDRadeon R6 M435DX
