Radeon Graphics vs R5 M255

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R5 M255 with Radeon Graphics, including specs and performance data.

R5 M255
2014
4 GB DDR3
1.39

Graphics outperforms R5 M255 by a considerable 42% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking1005894
Place by popularitynot in top-10010
Power efficiencyno data9.12
ArchitectureGCN 3.0 (2014−2019)GCN 5.1 (2018−2022)
GPU code nameTopazRenoir
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date12 October 2014 (10 years ago)no data (2024 years ago)

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores384448
Compute units5no data
Core clock speed925 MHzno data
Boost clock speed940 MHz1500 MHz
Number of transistors1,550 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data15 Watt
Texture fill rate22.5642.00
Floating-point processing power0.7219 TFLOPS1.344 TFLOPS
ROPs88
TMUs2428

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Bus supportPCIe 3.0 x8no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x8IGP
Widthno dataIGP

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeDDR3System Shared
Maximum RAM amount4 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width64 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1000 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth16 GB/sno data
Shared memory-no data

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs
Eyefinity+-

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

AppAcceleration+-
HD3D+-
PowerTune+-
DualGraphics+-
ZeroCore+-
Switchable graphics+-

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectXDirectX® 1112 (12_1)
Shader Model6.3no data
OpenGL4.44.6
OpenCLNot Listedno data
Mantle+-

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

R5 M255 1.39
Radeon Graphics 1.98
+42.4%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

R5 M255 536
Radeon Graphics 764
+42.5%

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

900p21
−28.6%
27−30
+28.6%
Full HD13
−38.5%
18−20
+38.5%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 6
−33.3%
8−9
+33.3%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
−33.3%
8−9
+33.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Hitman 3 5
−40%
7−8
+40%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
−40%
21−24
+40%
Red Dead Redemption 2 9
−33.3%
12−14
+33.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12
−33.3%
16−18
+33.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−36.4%
45−50
+36.4%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
−33.3%
8−9
+33.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Hitman 3 6−7
−33.3%
8−9
+33.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
−40%
21−24
+40%
Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8
−25%
10−11
+25%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21
−28.6%
27−30
+28.6%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−36.4%
45−50
+36.4%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
−33.3%
8−9
+33.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Hitman 3 6−7
−33.3%
8−9
+33.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 5
−40%
7−8
+40%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8
−25%
10−11
+25%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−36.4%
45−50
+36.4%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Hitman 3 7−8
−28.6%
9−10
+28.6%
Horizon Zero Dawn 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 7−8
−28.6%
9−10
+28.6%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%

This is how R5 M255 and Graphics compete in popular games:

  • Graphics is 29% faster in 900p
  • Graphics is 38% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.39 1.98
Chip lithography 28 nm 7 nm

Graphics has a 42.4% higher aggregate performance score, and a 300% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon Graphics is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R5 M255 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R5 M255 is a notebook card while Radeon Graphics is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


AMD Radeon R5 M255
Radeon R5 M255
AMD Radeon Graphics
Radeon Graphics

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


2.4 65 votes

Rate Radeon R5 M255 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 6198 votes

Rate Radeon Graphics on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.