Radeon R5 M435 vs Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS and Radeon R5 M435, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS outperforms R5 M435 by a whopping 432% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 473 | 936 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 28.65 | no data |
| Architecture | no data | GCN 1.0 (2012−2020) |
| GPU code name | no data | Jet |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 26 October 2023 (2 years ago) | 15 May 2016 (10 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. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 1536 | 320 |
| Core clock speed | no data | 780 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1250 MHz | 1030 MHz |
| Number of transistors | no data | 690 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 4 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 30 Watt | no data |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 20.60 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 0.6592 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | no data | 8 |
| TMUs | no data | 20 |
| L1 Cache | no data | 80 KB |
| L2 Cache | no data | 128 KB |
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).
| Interface | no data | PCIe 3.0 x8 |
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 type | LPDDR5x | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | no data | 2 GB |
| Memory bus width | no data | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 8448 MHz | 1125 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 36 GB/s |
| Shared memory | + | - |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
| Display Connectors | no data | No outputs |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12_1 | 12 (11_1) |
| Shader Model | no data | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | no data | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | - | 1.2.131 |
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:
| Full HD | 31
+520%
| 5−6
−520%
|
| 1440p | 14
+600%
| 2−3
−600%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 60−65
+510%
|
10−11
−510%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 21−24
+475%
|
4−5
−475%
|
| Palworld | 24−27
+550%
|
4−5
−550%
|
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 21−24
+450%
|
4−5
−450%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 45−50
+444%
|
9−10
−444%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 60−65
+510%
|
10−11
−510%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 21−24
+475%
|
4−5
−475%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 30
+500%
|
5−6
−500%
|
| Fortnite | 65−70
+450%
|
12−14
−450%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 45−50
+433%
|
9−10
−433%
|
| Palworld | 24−27
+550%
|
4−5
−550%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 40−45
+471%
|
7−8
−471%
|
| Valorant | 100−110
+467%
|
18−20
−467%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 45−50
+444%
|
9−10
−444%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 60−65
+510%
|
10−11
−510%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 160−170
+443%
|
30−33
−443%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 21−24
+475%
|
4−5
−475%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 28
+460%
|
5−6
−460%
|
| Fortnite | 65−70
+450%
|
12−14
−450%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 45−50
+433%
|
9−10
−433%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 35
+483%
|
6−7
−483%
|
| Metro Exodus | 21−24
+475%
|
4−5
−475%
|
| Palworld | 24−27
+550%
|
4−5
−550%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 40−45
+471%
|
7−8
−471%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 40
+471%
|
7−8
−471%
|
| Valorant | 100−110
+467%
|
18−20
−467%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 45−50
+444%
|
9−10
−444%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 21−24
+475%
|
4−5
−475%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 26
+550%
|
4−5
−550%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 45−50
+433%
|
9−10
−433%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 40−45
+471%
|
7−8
−471%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 19
+533%
|
3−4
−533%
|
| Valorant | 100−110
+467%
|
18−20
−467%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 65−70
+450%
|
12−14
−450%
|
| Palworld | 24−27
+550%
|
4−5
−550%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 21−24
+600%
|
3−4
−600%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 85−90
+507%
|
14−16
−507%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 15
+650%
|
2−3
−650%
|
| Metro Exodus | 12−14
+550%
|
2−3
−550%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 55−60
+470%
|
10−11
−470%
|
| Valorant | 110−120
+517%
|
18−20
−517%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 30−33
+500%
|
5−6
−500%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 9−10
+800%
|
1−2
−800%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 24−27
+500%
|
4−5
−500%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 27−30
+440%
|
5−6
−440%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 14−16
+650%
|
2−3
−650%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 24−27
+500%
|
4−5
−500%
|
| Palworld | 14−16
+650%
|
2−3
−650%
|
4K
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 6−7
+500%
|
1−2
−500%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 21−24
+450%
|
4−5
−450%
|
| Metro Exodus | 7−8
+600%
|
1−2
−600%
|
| Palworld | 8−9
+700%
|
1−2
−700%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 14−16
+600%
|
2−3
−600%
|
| Valorant | 50−55
+478%
|
9−10
−478%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 14−16
+650%
|
2−3
−650%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 6−7
+500%
|
1−2
−500%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 10−12
+450%
|
2−3
−450%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 18−20
+533%
|
3−4
−533%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
+450%
|
2−3
−450%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 10−12
+450%
|
2−3
−450%
|
| Palworld | 8−9
+700%
|
1−2
−700%
|
This is how Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS and R5 M435 compete in popular games:
- Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS is 520% faster in 1080p
- Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS is 600% faster in 1440p
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 11.11 | 2.09 |
| Recency | 26 October 2023 | 15 May 2016 |
| Chip lithography | 4 nm | 28 nm |
Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS has a 432% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, and a 600% more advanced lithography process.
The Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R5 M435 in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
