NVIDIA GeForce 920M vs AMD Radeon R5 M240
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce 920M and AMD Radeon R5 M240 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 5 month(s) later
- Around 20% higher pipelines: 384 vs 320
- Around 59% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 719 vs 451
- Around 81% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1598 vs 881
- 2.5x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3636 vs 1444
- Around 3% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3358 vs 3249
- Around 81% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1598 vs 881
- 2.5x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3636 vs 1444
- Around 3% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3358 vs 3249
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 13 March 2015 vs 18 September 2014 |
Pipelines | 384 vs 320 |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 719 vs 451 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1598 vs 881 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3636 vs 1444 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 vs 3249 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1598 vs 881 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3636 vs 1444 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 vs 3249 |
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R5 M240
- Around 5% higher core clock speed: 1000 MHz vs 954 MHz
- Around 66% higher texture fill rate: 20.6 GTexel / s vs 12.4 GTexel / s
- 2.2x better floating-point performance: 659.2 gflops vs 297.6 gflops
- Around 32% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 156 vs 118
Specifications (specs) | |
Core clock speed | 1000 MHz vs 954 MHz |
Texture fill rate | 20.6 GTexel / s vs 12.4 GTexel / s |
Floating-point performance | 659.2 gflops vs 297.6 gflops |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 156 vs 118 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 3721 vs 3709 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce 920M
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R5 M240
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 M240 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 719 | 451 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 118 | 156 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 3709 | 3721 |
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 | 881 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3636 | 1444 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 | 3249 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1598 | 881 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3636 | 1444 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 | 3249 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 326 |
Compare specifications (specs)
NVIDIA GeForce 920M | AMD Radeon R5 M240 | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | Kepler 2.0 | GCN 1.0 |
Code name | GK208B | Jet |
Launch date | 13 March 2015 | 18 September 2014 |
Place in performance rating | 1309 | 1310 |
Type | Laptop | Desktop |
Design | AMD Radeon R5 200 Series | |
Technical info |
||
Core clock speed | 954 MHz | 1000 MHz |
Floating-point performance | 297.6 gflops | 659.2 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
Pipelines | 384 | 320 |
Texture fill rate | 12.4 GTexel / s | 20.6 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 33 Watt | |
Transistor count | 585 million | 1,040 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Bus support | PCI Express 3.0 | Not Listed |
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 11 |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.4 |
Mantle | ||
OpenCL | Not Listed | |
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | |
Memory bandwidth | 14.4 GB / s | 14.4 GB / s |
Memory bus width | 64 Bit | |
Memory clock speed | 1800 MHz | |
Memory type | DDR3 | Not Listed |
Shared memory | 0 | 0 |
Technologies |
||
3D Vision | ||
3D Vision / 3DTV Play | ||
CUDA | ||
GameWorks | ||
GPU Boost | ||
Optimus | ||
Verde Drivers | ||
AMD Eyefinity | ||
AppAcceleration | ||
DualGraphics | ||
Enduro | ||
HD3D | ||
Powerplay | ||
PowerTune | ||
Switchable graphics | ||
ZeroCore |