AMD Radeon 740M vs AMD Radeon 820M Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains benchmark results for the AMD Radeon 740M, but the AMD Radeon 820M has no recorded benchmark scores. This makes a direct head-to-head comparison impossible based on measured performance. The 740M shows an average benchmark score of 12870 across its recorded tests, which places it at the 53rd percentile among all GPUs. Its Geekbench OpenCL score is 10172, and its Geekbench Vulkan score is 15568.

The 820M, by contrast, has an average benchmark score of 0 and sits at the 50th percentile. This absence of data means the 820M cannot be positioned against the 740M using actual test results. The nearest rivals listed for the 740M provide context for its standing: the AMD FirePro W5100 scores 12847, which is 0.2% lower than the 740M; the AMD Radeon Pro 455 scores 12831, 0.3% lower; the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590 scores 12830, 0.3% lower; and the AMD Radeon RX 580 scores 12928, which is 0.4% higher than the 740M.

The 740M's average score of 12870 sits nearly at parity with its nearest rivals, all of which fall within a 0.4% band. The RX 580 leads that group by a hair, while the FirePro W5100, Radeon Pro 455, and GTX 590 trail by fractions of a percent. These deltas are small enough that they fall within typical run-to-run variance, meaning the 740M performs essentially on par with those older discrete cards.

With no benchmarks recorded for the 820M, there are no wins to attribute to either part. The 740M has two recorded test scores; the 820M has none. Any comparison of their compute performance must rely on architectural specifications rather than measured outcomes.

Where Each One Wins

The 740M wins in every measurable category because it is the only one with recorded data. Its FP32 throughput is 2.867 TFLOPS, and its FP16 throughput is also 2.867 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio. The 820M delivers 716.8 GFLOPS in both FP32 and FP16, also at a 1:1 ratio. In raw compute, the 740M offers four times the floating-point throughput of the 820M.

Pixel throughput follows the same pattern. The 740M processes 22.40 GPixel/s, while the 820M manages 11.20 GPixel/s, exactly half. Texture rate for the 740M is 44.80 GTexel/s, and the 820M delivers 22.40 GTexel/s, again half. These differences stem from the hardware configuration: the 740M uses 256 shading units, 16 texture mapping units, and 8 render output units, while the 820M uses 128 shading units, 8 TMUs, and 4 ROPs.

The 740M also carries 4 ray tracing cores versus 2 on the 820M. Both parts support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API feature coverage is identical. The 740M's clock behavior differs too: its base clock is 800 MHz, while the 820M's base clock is 400 MHz. Both boost to 2800 MHz.

The 740M is rated at 45 W TDP, while the 820M is rated at 15 W TDP. This means the 820M operates at one-third the power envelope of the 740M. For systems where power draw is the primary constraint, the 820M offers a lower-power path, though with proportionally reduced compute resources.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute performance?

A: The AMD Radeon 740M delivers 2.867 TFLOPS in both FP32 and FP16, while the AMD Radeon 820M delivers 716.8 GFLOPS in both. The 740M has four times the floating-point throughput.

Q: How do the core counts compare?

A: The 740M uses 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. The 820M uses 128 shading units, 8 TMUs, and 4 ROPs. The 740M has double the shading units, TMUs, and ROPs of the 820M.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same APIs?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: What is the difference in boost clocks?

A: Both GPUs boost to 2800 MHz. The base clocks differ, with the 740M at 800 MHz and the 820M at 400 MHz.

Q: Which GPU has more ray tracing cores?

A: The 740M has 4 ray tracing cores, while the 820M has 2.

Q: What are the power ratings for each GPU?

A: The 740M has a TDP of 45 W, and the 820M has a TDP of 15 W.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every specification field. The 740M uses the Phoenix2 chip, while the 820M uses the Krackan Point 2 chip. Both are built on a 4 nm process at TSMC, but the 740M has 20,900 million transistors on a 137 mm² die, while the 820M's transistor count and die size are listed as unknown.

The 740M's transistor density is 152.6M per mm²; no density figure is available for the 820M. The 740M has a base clock of 800 MHz, and the 820M has a base clock of 400 MHz. Both boost to 2800 MHz. The 740M achieves a pixel rate of 22.40 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 44.80 GTexel/s, while the 820M achieves 11.20 GPixel/s and 22.40 GTexel/s respectively.

The 740M provides 2.867 TFLOPS of FP32 and FP16 performance. The 820M provides 716.8 GFLOPS of both. The 740M is rated at 45 W TDP, the 820M at 15 W. Both are IGP slot width with no power connectors. Both use PCIe 4.0 x8. Display outputs differ: the 740M is motherboard dependent, while the 820M is portable device dependent.

The 740M released on 2024-01-30, and the 820M released on 2025-02-28. The 740M has a successor listed as Navi III IGP, while the 820M has no successor listed. Both share the same predecessor, Navi II IGP.

Architecture Differences

The 740M is built on RDNA 3.0 architecture, while the 820M uses RDNA 3.5. Both are part of the Navi III IGP generation, but the 740M belongs to the Phoenix sub-family and the 820M belongs to the Strix Point Mobile sub-family. The 740M uses the Phoenix2 chip, and the 820M uses the Krackan Point 2 chip.

The 740M has 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, 8 ROPs, and 4 ray tracing cores. The 820M has 128 shading units, 8 TMUs, 4 ROPs, and 2 ray tracing cores. Every compute resource on the 740M is exactly double that of the 820M.

Both GPUs use system-shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth, so memory configuration does not differentiate them. Both support PCIe 4.0 x8. The 740M is fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC with 20,900 million transistors and a 137 mm² die. The 820M is also on a 4 nm process at TSMC, but its transistor count and die size are unknown.

The 740M has a base clock of 800 MHz versus 400 MHz on the 820M, though both boost to 2800 MHz. The 740M's TDP of 45 W is triple the 820M's 15 W TDP. The 740M was released in January 2024, and the 820M followed in February 2025.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear split based on workload and power constraints. The 740M is the stronger compute part by every measured and specified metric: four times the FP32 throughput, double the pixel rate, double the texture rate, double the shading units, and double the ray tracing cores. Its average benchmark score of 12870 places it at the 53rd percentile, and its nearest rivals cluster within 0.4% of that score, indicating the 740M performs like a mid-range discrete GPU from a few generations ago.

The 820M has no benchmark results in the database, so its real-world performance cannot be confirmed. Its specifications suggest a much lighter workload capability: 716.8 GFLOPS FP32, 11.20 GPixel/s, and 22.40 GTexel/s. At 15 W TDP, it draws one-third the power of the 740M, making it suited to systems where power efficiency takes priority over compute throughput.

For users who need measurable graphics performance, the 740M is the only option with recorded data. For users constrained by power draw in a portable device, the 820M offers a lower-power alternative, though it carries no benchmark scores to validate its performance level. The 740M's 45 W TDP and its benchmark results indicate it handles heavier graphical workloads, while the 820M's specifications point to a more modest role.