AMD Radeon 740M vs AMD Radeon RX 7600 Comparison

AMD Radeon RX 7600 and AMD Radeon 740M represent two distinct approaches within the same RDNA 3.0 architecture family: one is a dedicated add-in board for desktop systems, while the other is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) built into a mobile chip. The database records show a clear performance hierarchy, but the differences extend beyond raw score into memory architecture, power envelopes, and physical design. This analysis walks through the head-to-head results, answers common questions about the data, and breaks down where each component fits based on the recorded measurements.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains two direct comparison results between these GPUs, and the RX 7600 wins both. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 7600 scores 88,051 points against the 740M’s 10,172 points. That is a delta of 765.6% in favor of the RX 7600, meaning the dedicated card delivers roughly eight and a half times the OpenCL compute performance of the integrated part. This is the largest margin recorded in any shared test, and it reflects the massive disparity in shading units (2,048 versus 256) and memory bandwidth (288.0 GB/s dedicated GDDR6 versus system shared memory).

In Geekbench Vulkan, the gap narrows but remains decisive. The RX 7600 scores 34,401 points, while the 740M scores 15,568 points. The delta here is 121%, meaning the RX 7600 is more than twice as fast in this graphics API workload. Vulkan’s lower overhead and the 740M’s RDNA 3.0 feature set allow the integrated part to put up a relatively stronger showing than in OpenCL, but it still trails by a wide margin. The RX 7600’s 32 ray tracing cores versus the 740M’s 4, plus its 64 ROPs versus 8, explain why the dedicated card maintains such a lead in graphics-heavy tests.

Looking at the broader benchmark averages, the RX 7600 posts an average score of 15,171 across all recorded tests, while the 740M averages 12,870. Interestingly, the RX 7600’s average is dragged down by its inclusion in many more tests, including DirectX 9, 10, 11, and 12 PassMark runs, where older API workloads can be less flattering to modern architectures. The 740M only has two recorded benchmarks in the database, both Geekbench tests, so its average reflects a narrower sample. Despite this, the RX 7600’s percentile ranking of 57 versus the 740M’s 53 shows both sit in the mid-range of all GPUs tracked, but the RX 7600 is positioned slightly higher.

The nearest rival data puts these scores into context. The RX 7600’s closest competitors include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM at 15,199 average score (0.2% higher), the AMD Radeon 680M at 15,270 (0.7% higher), the AMD Radeon Pro 560X at 15,082 (0.6% lower), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 Ti at 15,063 (0.7% lower). The 740M, by contrast, sits near the AMD FirePro W5100 (12,847, 0.2% higher), AMD Radeon Pro 455 (12,831, 0.3% higher), NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590 (12,830, 0.3% higher), and AMD Radeon RX 580 (12,928, 0.4% higher). The RX 580 comparison is notable: an older, dedicated card still edges out the 740M by 0.4% in average score, showing that even integrated parts from 2024 have not surpassed older discrete solutions in overall recorded performance.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher recorded average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7600 has an average score of 15,171 across all recorded tests, compared to the AMD Radeon 740M’s 12,870. The RX 7600 also holds a higher percentile ranking at 57 versus 53.

Q: How much faster is the RX 7600 in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The RX 7600 scores 88,051 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the 740M scores 10,172. The delta is 765.6%, making the RX 7600 approximately 8.65 times faster in that workload.

Q: Does the 740M win any head-to-head benchmark?

A: No. Across the two shared tests (Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan), the RX 7600 wins both. The recorded win count is 2 for the RX 7600 and 0 for the 740M.

Q: What is the transistor density difference between the two chips?

A: The RX 7600 uses a 6 nm process with 13,300 million transistors on a 204 mm² die, yielding a density of 65.2M transistors per mm². The 740M uses a 4 nm process with 20,900 million transistors on a 137 mm² die, yielding a much higher density of 152.6M per mm².

Q: Are both GPUs based on the same architecture?

A: Yes, both use RDNA 3.0. The RX 7600 is built on the Navi 33 chip (codename Hotpink Bonefish) in the Navi III (RX 7000) generation, while the 740M uses the Phoenix2 chip in the Navi III IGP (Phoenix) generation.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference?

A: The RX 7600 has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth. The 740M uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth, meaning its performance scales with the host system’s RAM configuration.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs share the RDNA 3.0 architecture and support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. They also both use a PCIe 4.0 x8 bus interface. That is where the architectural similarities end.

The RX 7600 is built on TSMC’s 6 nm process with 13,300 million transistors on a 204 mm² die. Its transistor density is 65.2M per mm². The 740M uses TSMC’s 4 nm process with 20,900 million transistors on a 137 mm² die, achieving a density of 152.6M per mm². The 4 nm node packs more transistors into a smaller area, which is typical for an integrated part that must share the die with CPU cores and other system components. The RX 7600’s larger die is dedicated entirely to graphics processing.

Compute resources differ by an order of magnitude. The RX 7600 has 2,048 shading units, 128 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 64 render output units (ROPs). The 740M has 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. Ray tracing cores follow the same pattern: 32 on the RX 7600 versus 4 on the 740M. These ratios explain the pixel and texture rate gaps. The RX 7600 delivers 169.9 GPixel/s and 339.8 GTexel/s, while the 740M manages 22.40 GPixel/s and 44.80 GTexel/s.

Clock speeds tell a more nuanced story. The RX 7600 has a base clock of 1720 MHz, a game clock of 2250 MHz, and a boost clock of 2655 MHz. The 740M has a much lower base clock of 800 MHz but a higher boost clock of 2800 MHz. This suggests the integrated part can reach high frequencies under short bursts but relies on system thermals and power limits, whereas the dedicated card sustains higher base performance. The FP32 compute figures reflect the combined effect of clocks and shader count: the RX 7600 hits 21.75 TFLOPS, while the 740M reaches 2.867 TFLOPS, both at 1:1 FP16 ratios.

Memory architecture is fundamentally different. The RX 7600 uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 288.0 GB/s of dedicated bandwidth. The 740M uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth, meaning its memory performance is tied to the host laptop or mini PC’s RAM implementation. This is a critical differentiator for bandwidth-sensitive workloads.

Power and physical design diverge sharply. The RX 7600 has a 165 W TDP, requires a 1x 8-pin power connector, suggests a 450 W power supply, and occupies a dual-slot form factor measuring 204 mm in length and 115 mm in height. The 740M has a 45 W TDP, requires no power connector, is classified as an IGP, and has dimensions dependent on the motherboard. Display outputs also differ: the RX 7600 offers 1x HDMI 2.1a and 3x DisplayPort 2.1, while the 740M’s outputs are motherboard dependent.

Release timing shows the RX 7600 launched on 2023-05-24, while the 740M arrived on 2024-01-30. The RX 7600 has a recorded launch MSRP of 269 USD. The 740M has no recorded launch MSRP, consistent with its role as an integrated component sold as part of a larger processor package.

The Verdict

The data supports a straightforward split. The AMD Radeon RX 7600 is the clear choice for any workload where dedicated graphics performance matters. It wins both head-to-head tests, holds a higher average score (15,171 versus 12,870), and delivers 765.6% more OpenCL performance and 121% more Vulkan performance. Its 8 GB of GDDR6 memory with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth provides consistent, predictable performance that does not depend on system RAM. Users who play demanding games, run GPU-accelerated compute tasks, or need reliable display outputs across multiple monitors should look at the RX 7600.

The AMD Radeon 740M serves a different purpose. Its 45 W TDP, lack of power connectors, and IGP form factor make it suitable for thin-and-light laptops or compact systems where the RX 7600’s dual-slot footprint and 165 W power draw are physically impossible. The 740M’s higher boost clock (2800 MHz versus 2655 MHz) and smaller process node (4 nm versus 6 nm) show it is engineered for efficiency within tight thermal budgets. However, the benchmark data is unambiguous: the 740M cannot match the RX 7600 in any recorded test, and its nearest rivals include the RX 580, an older discrete GPU that still edges it out by 0.4%.

There is no scenario in the recorded data where the 740M outperforms the RX 7600. The choice comes down to system constraints and intended use. If the platform can accommodate a dual-slot, 165 W card with an 8-pin connector, the RX 7600 is the superior option. If the system is an ultraportable or integrated design, the 740M is the only one of the two that fits, and its performance should be evaluated against the understanding that it trails the RX 7600 by 121% to 765.6% depending on the workload.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon RX 7600 | AMD Radeon 740M |

|---|---|---|

| Process node | 6 nm | 4 nm |

| Transistors | 13,300 million | 20,900 million |

| Die size | 204 mm² | 137 mm² |

| Transistor density | 65.2M / mm² | 152.6M / mm² |

| Base clock | 1720 MHz | 800 MHz |

| Boost clock | 2655 MHz | 2800 MHz |

| Game clock | 2250 MHz | None recorded |

| Memory size | 8 GB | System Shared |

| Memory type | GDDR6 | System Shared |

| Memory bus width | 128 bit | System Shared |

| Memory bandwidth | 288.0 GB/s | System Dependent |

| Shading units | 2048 | 256 |

| TMUs | 128 | 16 |

| ROPs | 64 | 8 |

| Ray tracing cores | 32 | 4 |

| Pixel rate | 169.9 GPixel/s | 22.40 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 339.8 GTexel/s | 44.80 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 21.75 TFLOPS | 2.867 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 21.75 TFLOPS (1:1) | 2.867 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 165 W | 45 W |

| Slot width | Dual-slot | IGP |

| Power connectors | 1x 8-pin | None |

| Suggested PSU | 450 W | None recorded |

| Dimensions | 204 mm x 115 mm | Motherboard dependent |

| Display outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1a, 3x DisplayPort 2.1 | Motherboard dependent |

| Release date | 2023-05-24 | 2024-01-30 |

| Launch MSRP | 269 USD | None recorded |

Where Each One Wins

The RX 7600 wins every recorded benchmark category. In Geekbench OpenCL, its 88,051 score versus 10,172 represents the largest margin in the dataset, making it the choice for compute-heavy applications that leverage OpenCL, such as rendering, physics simulation, and some machine learning inference tasks. In Geekbench Vulkan, its 34,401 score versus 15,568 shows a strong advantage in modern graphics APIs, which matters for games and applications that use Vulkan for lower overhead and better multi-threaded performance. The RX 7600’s dedicated 8 GB GDDR6 frame buffer with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth ensures texture streaming and high-resolution assets do not contend with system memory, and its 32 ray tracing cores provide hardware acceleration for ray-traced effects that the 740M’s 4 cores cannot match in throughput.

The 740M’s advantages are not performance-based but system-based. Its 4 nm process and 152.6M / mm² transistor density mean it delivers RDNA 3.0 features in a much smaller physical footprint. Its 45 W TDP and lack of power connectors allow it to operate in systems where the RX 7600’s 165 W TDP and dual-slot cooler would not fit. The 740M’s higher boost clock of 2800 MHz suggests it can reach competitive peak frequencies when thermals allow, potentially narrowing the gap in short, bursty workloads. For users building or buying a system with no expansion slot for a discrete GPU, the 740M is the only viable option between these two, and its system shared memory architecture means its performance will vary with the host platform’s RAM speed and capacity.

The recorded data also shows the 740M holds its own against older discrete GPUs in average score, sitting within 0.4% of the RX 580 and within 0.3% of the GTX 590 and Radeon Pro 455. This suggests that for legacy games or light productivity tasks, the 740M is a capable integrated solution, but it remains firmly below the RX 7600 in every shared measurement. The RX 7600’s nearest rivals are all newer or more powerful parts (RTX 3050 OEM, Radeon 680M), reflecting its position as a modern entry-level discrete card, while the 740M’s rivals are a mix of workstation and older enthusiast parts. Users should choose based on platform constraints first: if a discrete card can be installed, the RX 7600 dominates; if not, the 740M provides the same architecture generation in an integrated package with significantly lower power requirements.