Intel HD Graphics vs AMD Radeon R5 M255
Comparative analysis of Intel HD Graphics and AMD Radeon R5 M255 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 - 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), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps).
Differences
Reasons to consider the Intel HD Graphics
- Videocard is newer: launch date 2 month(s) later
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 28 nm
- Around 43% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 193 vs 135
- Around 14% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 5315 vs 4650
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 5 January 2015 vs 12 October 2014 |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm vs 28 nm |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 193 vs 135 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 5315 vs 4650 |
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R5 M255
- 3.1x more core clock speed: 925 MHz vs 300 MHz
- Around 11% higher boost clock speed: 940 MHz vs 850 MHz
- 17.4x more texture fill rate: 22.56 GTexel / s vs 1.3 GTexel / s
- 53.3x more pipelines: 320 vs 6
- 46.3x better floating-point performance: 721.9 gflops vs 15.6 gflops
- Around 16% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 538 vs 462
- 3.1x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1459 vs 470
- 182.4x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1459 vs 8
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Core clock speed | 925 MHz vs 300 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 940 MHz vs 850 MHz |
| Texture fill rate | 22.56 GTexel / s vs 1.3 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 320 vs 6 |
| Floating-point performance | 721.9 gflops vs 15.6 gflops |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 538 vs 462 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1459 vs 470 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1459 vs 8 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: Intel HD Graphics
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R5 M255
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
| Name | Intel HD Graphics | AMD Radeon R5 M255 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 462 | 538 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 193 | 135 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 5315 | 4650 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 470 | 1459 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 8 | 1459 |
| 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 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1715 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3357 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1715 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3357 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| Intel HD Graphics | AMD Radeon R5 M255 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Generation 8.0 | GCN 3.0 |
| Code name | Broadwell GT1 | Topaz |
| Launch date | 5 January 2015 | 12 October 2014 |
| Place in performance rating | 1367 | 1368 |
| Type | Desktop | Desktop |
| Design | AMD Radeon R5 200 Series | |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 850 MHz | 940 MHz |
| Core clock speed | 300 MHz | 925 MHz |
| Floating-point performance | 15.6 gflops | 721.9 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 6 | 320 |
| Texture fill rate | 1.3 GTexel / s | 22.56 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 6 Watt | |
| Transistor count | 1,300 million | 3,100 million |
| Compute units | 5 | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x1 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |
| Bus support | PCIe 3.0 x8 | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (11_1) | 11 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.4 |
| Mantle | ||
| OpenCL | Not Listed | |
Memory |
||
| Memory type | System Shared | DDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | |
| Memory bandwidth | 16 GB/s | |
| Memory bus width | 64 bit | |
| Memory clock speed | 1000 MHz | |
| Shared memory | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
| AMD Eyefinity | ||
| AppAcceleration | ||
| DualGraphics | ||
| Enduro | ||
| HD3D | ||
| Powerplay | ||
| PowerTune | ||
| Switchable graphics | ||
| ZeroCore | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare Intel HD Graphics with others
IntelHD Graphics vs
ATIRadeon IGP 340M
IntelHD Graphics vs
AMDRadeon HD 8400 IGP
IntelHD Graphics vs
NVIDIAGeForce GT 820M
IntelHD Graphics vs
AMDRadeon R5 M255
IntelHD Graphics vs
NVIDIAGeForce 910M
IntelHD Graphics vs
AMDRadeon R6 M435DX
