NVIDIA GeForce 920M vs AMD Radeon R5 230
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce 920M and AMD Radeon R5 230 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), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Differences
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce 920M
- Videocard is newer: launch date 11 month(s) later
- 2.5x more texture fill rate: 12.4 GTexel / s vs 5 GTexel / s
- 2.4x more pipelines: 384 vs 160
- Around 49% better floating-point performance: 297.6 gflops vs 200.0 gflops
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 28 nm vs 40 nm
- 3.2x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 721 vs 222
- 3.6x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1598 vs 439
- 3.7x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3636 vs 992
- Around 35% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3358 vs 2480
- 3.6x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1598 vs 439
- 3.7x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3636 vs 992
- Around 35% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3358 vs 2480
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 13 March 2015 vs 3 April 2014 |
Texture fill rate | 12.4 GTexel / s vs 5 GTexel / s |
Pipelines | 384 vs 160 |
Floating-point performance | 297.6 gflops vs 200.0 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm vs 40 nm |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 721 vs 222 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1598 vs 439 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3636 vs 992 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 vs 2480 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1598 vs 439 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3636 vs 992 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 vs 2480 |
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R5 230
- Around 74% lower typical power consumption: 19 Watt vs 33 Watt
- 2.2x better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 255 vs 118
- Around 12% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 4127 vs 3697
Specifications (specs) | |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 19 Watt vs 33 Watt |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 255 vs 118 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 4127 vs 3697 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce 920M
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R5 230
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
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 | NVIDIA GeForce 920M | AMD Radeon R5 230 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 721 | 222 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 118 | 255 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 3697 | 4127 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 8.358 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 157.606 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.843 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 15.374 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 40.443 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1598 | 439 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3636 | 992 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 | 2480 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1598 | 439 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3636 | 992 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 | 2480 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 326 |
Compare specifications (specs)
NVIDIA GeForce 920M | AMD Radeon R5 230 | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | Kepler 2.0 | TeraScale 2 |
Code name | GK208B | Caicos |
Launch date | 13 March 2015 | 3 April 2014 |
Place in performance rating | 1310 | 1311 |
Type | Laptop | Desktop |
Design | AMD Radeon R5 200 Series | |
Price now | $50 | |
Value for money (0-100) | 6.10 | |
Technical info |
||
Core clock speed | 954 MHz | |
Floating-point performance | 297.6 gflops | 200.0 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 40 nm |
Pipelines | 384 | 160 |
Texture fill rate | 12.4 GTexel / s | 5 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 33 Watt | 19 Watt |
Transistor count | 585 million | 370 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | No outputs | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA |
DisplayPort support | ||
Dual-link DVI support | ||
Eyefinity | ||
HDMI | ||
VGA | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Bus support | PCI Express 3.0 | PCIe 1.0 x4 |
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
Length | 168 mm | |
Supplementary power connectors | N / A | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 11 |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.4 |
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 4 GB |
Memory bandwidth | 14.4 GB / s | 10.67 GB / s |
Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 64 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 1800 MHz | |
Memory type | DDR3 | DDR3 |
Shared memory | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
3D Vision | ||
3D Vision / 3DTV Play | ||
CUDA | ||
GameWorks | ||
GPU Boost | ||
Optimus | ||
Verde Drivers | ||
AMD Eyefinity | ||
CrossFire | ||
DDMA audio | ||
PowerPlay |