Radeon R5 230 vs Apple M1 8-Core GPU

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Apple M1 8-Core GPU with Radeon R5 230, including specs and performance data.

Apple M1 8-Core GPU
2020
14.54
+2451%

Apple M1 8-Core GPU outperforms R5 230 by a whopping 2451% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking3561205
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data2.09
Architectureno dataTeraScale 2 (2009−2015)
GPU code nameno dataCaicos
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Designno datareference
Release date10 November 2020 (4 years ago)3 April 2014 (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. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores8160
Core clock speed1278 MHzno data
Number of transistorsno data370 million
Manufacturing process technology5 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data19 Watt
Texture fill rateno data5.000
Floating-point processing powerno data0.2 TFLOPS
ROPsno data4
TMUsno data8

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 supportno dataPCIe 1.0 x4
Interfaceno dataPCIe 2.0 x16
Lengthno data168 mm
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataN/A

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 typeno dataDDR3
Maximum RAM amountno data4 GB
Memory bus widthno data64 Bit
Memory bandwidthno data10.67 GB/s
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 data1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA
Eyefinity-+
HDMI-+

Supported technologies

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

CrossFire-+
​PowerPlayno data+
DDMA audiono data-

API compatibility

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

DirectXno dataDirectX® 11
Shader Modelno data5.0
OpenGLno data4.4
OpenCLno data1.2

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 HD28
+2700%
1−2
−2700%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 21−24 0−1

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30−35
+3100%
1−2
−3100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 21−24 0−1
Battlefield 5 45−50
+4500%
1−2
−4500%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 27−30
+2700%
1−2
−2700%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24 0−1
Far Cry 5 30−35
+3200%
1−2
−3200%
Far Cry New Dawn 35−40
+3800%
1−2
−3800%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+2967%
3−4
−2967%
Hitman 3 27−30
+2600%
1−2
−2600%
Horizon Zero Dawn 70−75
+3500%
2−3
−3500%
Metro Exodus 45−50
+4600%
1−2
−4600%
Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
+3800%
1−2
−3800%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 45−50
+4500%
1−2
−4500%
Watch Dogs: Legion 75−80
+3700%
2−3
−3700%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30−35
+3100%
1−2
−3100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 21−24 0−1
Battlefield 5 45−50
+4500%
1−2
−4500%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 27−30
+2700%
1−2
−2700%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24 0−1
Far Cry 5 30−35
+3200%
1−2
−3200%
Far Cry New Dawn 35−40
+3800%
1−2
−3800%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+2967%
3−4
−2967%
Hitman 3 27−30
+2600%
1−2
−2600%
Horizon Zero Dawn 70−75
+3500%
2−3
−3500%
Metro Exodus 45−50
+4600%
1−2
−4600%
Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
+3800%
1−2
−3800%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 45−50
+4500%
1−2
−4500%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+3300%
1−2
−3300%
Watch Dogs: Legion 75−80
+3700%
2−3
−3700%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30−35
+3100%
1−2
−3100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 21−24 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 27−30
+2700%
1−2
−2700%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24 0−1
Far Cry 5 30−35
+3200%
1−2
−3200%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+2967%
3−4
−2967%
Hitman 3 27−30
+2600%
1−2
−2600%
Horizon Zero Dawn 70−75
+3500%
2−3
−3500%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 45−50
+4500%
1−2
−4500%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+3300%
1−2
−3300%
Watch Dogs: Legion 75−80
+3700%
2−3
−3700%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
+3800%
1−2
−3800%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 27−30
+2600%
1−2
−2600%
Far Cry New Dawn 21−24 0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−12 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 14−16 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8 0−1
Far Cry 5 16−18 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+3500%
2−3
−3500%
Hitman 3 16−18 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 27−30
+2800%
1−2
−2800%
Metro Exodus 24−27 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 24−27 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 85−90
+2800%
3−4
−2800%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24 0−1

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 10−11 0−1
Hitman 3 10−11 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 65−70
+3350%
2−3
−3350%
Metro Exodus 12−14 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 8−9 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 7−8 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3 0−1
Far Cry 5 8−9 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 18−20 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 5−6 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14 0−1

This is how Apple M1 8-Core GPU and R5 230 compete in popular games:

  • Apple M1 8-Core GPU is 2700% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 14.54 0.57
Recency 10 November 2020 3 April 2014
Chip lithography 5 nm 40 nm

Apple M1 8-Core GPU has a 2450.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, and a 700% more advanced lithography process.

The Apple M1 8-Core GPU is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R5 230 in performance tests.

Be aware that Apple M1 8-Core GPU is a notebook card while Radeon R5 230 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.


Apple M1 8-Core GPU
M1 8-Core GPU
AMD Radeon R5 230
Radeon R5 230

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.


4 908 votes

Rate Apple M1 8-Core GPU on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 238 votes

Rate Radeon R5 230 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.