AMD Radeon 740M vs AMD Radeon PRO W7400 Comparison

FAQ

Q: What are the average benchmark scores for the AMD Radeon 740M and AMD Radeon PRO W7400?

A: The Radeon 740M has an average benchmark score of 12,870 based on Geekbench OpenCL (10,172) and Vulkan (15,568) results. The Radeon PRO W7400 has no recorded benchmark scores in the database, making direct numeric comparison impossible.

Q: How does the Radeon 740M compare to its nearest rivals in the database?

A: The Radeon 740M sits within 0.4% of four competitors: it is 0.2% ahead of the AMD FirePro W5100 (12,847), 0.3% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro 455 (12,831), 0.3% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590 (12,830), and 0.4% behind the AMD Radeon RX 580 (12,928).

Q: What are the memory specifications for each GPU?

A: The Radeon 740M uses system-shared memory with bandwidth dependent on the host system. The Radeon PRO W7400 has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus with 172.8 GB/s bandwidth and a 1350 MHz memory clock (10.8 Gbps effective).

Q: What is the transistor count and die size for each chip?

A: The Radeon 740M, based on the Phoenix2 chip, contains 20,900 million transistors on a 137 mm² die, giving a density of 152.6 million transistors per mm². The Radeon PRO W7400, based on Navi 33, contains 13,300 million transistors on a 204 mm² die, yielding 65.2 million per mm².

Q: What are the TDP and physical form factor differences?

A: The Radeon 740M is an integrated graphics processor with a 45 W TDP and no power connectors. The Radeon PRO W7400 is a single-slot discrete card with a 55 W TDP, no power connectors, a suggested 250 W PSU, and dimensions of 168 mm length, 69 mm height, and 20 mm width.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units, texture units, and ray tracing cores?

A: The Radeon PRO W7400 has 1,792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, 64 ROPs, and 28 ray tracing cores. The Radeon 740M has 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, 8 ROPs, and 4 ray tracing cores.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear split between these two AMD RDNA 3.0 parts, but the lack of benchmark scores for the Radeon PRO W7400 means the verdict rests on architectural and specification comparisons rather than direct performance measurements.

For users constrained to integrated graphics, the Radeon 740M is the only option: it operates as an IGP within a Phoenix2-based system, draws 45 W, uses shared system memory, and carries a 53rd percentile ranking among all GPUs. Its average score of 12,870 places it within a tight cluster of older discrete cards, all within 0.4% of each other, suggesting balanced mid-range performance for its class.

For users needing a discrete, professional workstation card, the Radeon PRO W7400 is the choice. It offers substantially higher raw compute resources: 7.885 TFLOPS FP32 versus 2.867 TFLOPS, 1,792 shading units versus 256, 112 TMUs versus 16, 64 ROPs versus 8, and 28 ray tracing cores versus 4. It also brings dedicated 8 GB GDDR6 memory with 172.8 GB/s bandwidth, a 128-bit bus, and four DisplayPort 2.1 outputs, none of which the IGP can match.

The Radeon PRO W7400's 50th percentile ranking, despite having no recorded benchmark scores, indicates the database places it near the median of all GPUs based on its specifications. The Radeon 740M's 53rd percentile with actual scores shows it already performs around the median. The PRO card's 2.75x FP32 advantage suggests it should outperform the IGP significantly, but without recorded measurements, that remains an inference.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results between these two GPUs, and no wins are recorded for either side. The Radeon 740M has two individual benchmark scores: 10,172 in Geekbench OpenCL and 15,568 in Geekbench Vulkan, averaging to 12,870. The Radeon PRO W7400 has zero recorded benchmarks, so no comparative scores exist.

The nearest rival data for the Radeon 740M provides context: its average of 12,870 is 0.2% above the FirePro W5100's 12,847, 0.3% above the Radeon Pro 455's 12,831, 0.3% above the GTX 590's 12,830, and 0.4% below the RX 580's 12,928. These sub-1% deltas indicate the 740M performs essentially at parity with all four, a remarkably tight cluster.

For the Radeon PRO W7400, the absence of benchmark data means its performance relative to any rival, including the 740M, cannot be quantified from the database. The specification gaps, however, are pronounced. The PRO card's FP32 throughput of 7.885 TFLOPS is 2.75 times the 740M's 2.867 TFLOPS. Its pixel rate of 70.40 GPixel/s is 3.14 times higher than 22.40 GPixel/s. Its texture rate of 123.2 GTexel/s is 2.75 times higher than 44.80 GTexel/s.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every measurable specification. The Radeon 740M uses the Phoenix2 chip, while the Radeon PRO W7400 uses Navi 33. Process nodes differ: 4 nm for the IGP versus 6 nm for the discrete card. Transistor counts are 20,900 million versus 13,300 million, but die sizes are 137 mm² versus 204 mm², producing transistor densities of 152.6M/mm² versus 65.2M/mm².

Clock speeds show the IGP running higher: base 800 MHz versus 330 MHz, boost 2800 MHz versus 1100 MHz. Memory configurations diverge completely: system shared versus 8 GB GDDR6, 128-bit bus, 172.8 GB/s bandwidth, and 1350 MHz memory clock. The 740M's memory bandwidth is listed as system dependent, while the PRO card has a fixed 172.8 GB/s.

Compute resources differ by multiples: shading units 256 versus 1,792, TMUs 16 versus 112, ROPs 8 versus 64, ray tracing cores 4 versus 28. Pixel rate is 22.40 GPixel/s versus 70.40 GPixel/s, texture rate 44.80 GTexel/s versus 123.2 GTexel/s, and FP32 2.867 TFLOPS versus 7.885 TFLOPS. TDP is 45 W versus 55 W. The 740M is an IGP with motherboard-dependent display outputs; the PRO W7400 is a single-slot 168 mm card with four DisplayPort 2.1 outputs. Both use PCIe 4.0 x8 and share the same API support: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs share the RDNA 3.0 architecture and are manufactured by TSMC, but the implementations differ substantially. The Radeon 740M belongs to the Navi III IGP (Phoenix) generation and uses the Phoenix2 chip, while the Radeon PRO W7400 belongs to the Radeon Pro Navi (Navi III Series) generation with the codename "Hotpink Bonefish" and uses the Navi 33 chip.

The manufacturing process differs: the 740M uses a 4 nm node, while the PRO W7400 uses a 6 nm node. This explains the higher transistor density of the IGP (152.6M/mm² versus 65.2M/mm²) despite the PRO card having a larger die (204 mm² versus 137 mm²). The 740M packs more transistors into a smaller area, while the PRO card spreads fewer transistors across a larger die.

The 740M's predecessor is listed as Navi II IGP with a successor of Navi III IGP. The PRO W7400's predecessor is Radeon Pro Vega with no successor listed. The 740M was released on 2024-01-30, while the PRO W7400 has a release date of 2025-08-02, over a year later.

Both support FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, and neither has tensor cores. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The PRO W7400's ray tracing capability is significantly higher with 28 cores versus 4, suggesting a much larger ray tracing workload capacity.

Where Each One Wins

The Radeon 740M wins in integration and efficiency of manufacturing. As an IGP with a 45 W TDP and no power connectors, it requires no additional card slot, no PSU upgrade, and no cooling solution beyond the host system. Its 4 nm process node delivers a transistor density of 152.6M/mm², the highest among the two, and its boost clock of 2800 MHz far exceeds the PRO card's 1100 MHz. The 740M's percentile ranking of 53, based on actual benchmark scores, confirms it delivers functional performance within integrated graphics constraints. Its average score of 12,870 places it within 0.4% of four discrete GPUs from previous generations, indicating solid capability for its class.

The Radeon PRO W7400 wins in raw compute and professional features. Its FP32 throughput of 7.885 TFLOPS is 2.75 times the 740M's, its pixel rate of 70.40 GPixel/s is 3.14 times higher, and its texture rate of 123.2 GTexel/s is 2.75 times higher. The 8 GB GDDR6 memory with 172.8 GB/s bandwidth provides dedicated, predictable memory performance, unlike the system-dependent bandwidth of the 740M. The 1,792 shading units, 112 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 28 ray tracing cores give it substantial parallel processing capacity. The four DisplayPort 2.1 outputs enable multi-monitor professional setups, a capability the IGP cannot offer. Its 55 W TDP remains modest for a discrete card, requiring only a 250 W suggested PSU with no power connectors.

The release dates separate them by roughly 18 months, and the PRO W7400's status as a single-slot card with defined dimensions (168 mm by 69 mm by 20 mm) makes it suitable for workstation chassis. The 740M's motherboard-dependent outputs tie its display capabilities to the host system, while the PRO card offers standardized connectivity. For workloads requiring sustained compute, dedicated memory bandwidth, or professional display configurations, the PRO W7400's specifications clearly favor it, pending benchmark confirmation.