AMD Radeon 740M vs NVIDIA N1 16SM Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results between the AMD Radeon 740M and the NVIDIA N1 16SM. The AMD part has two submitted scores: 10,172 in Geekbench OpenCL and 15,568 in Geekbench Vulkan. These produce an average benchmark score of 12,870, placing it at the 53rd percentile among all GPUs in the database. The NVIDIA N1 16SM has no benchmark submissions on record, so its average score sits at zero and its percentile is 50, which reflects the absence of measured data rather than a neutral performance position.

The AMD Radeon 740M’s nearest rivals in the database provide context for its standing. The AMD FirePro W5100 averages 12,847, which is 0.2% behind the 740M. The AMD Radeon Pro 455 averages 12,831, also 0.2% behind. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590 averages 12,830, 0.3% behind. On the other side, the AMD Radeon RX 580 averages 12,928, which is 0.4% ahead of the 740M. These deltas are small, indicating that the 740M sits in a tightly packed performance band among established discrete GPUs from previous generations.

Because the NVIDIA N1 16SM has no benchmark entries, no comparative percentages can be calculated between the two parts. The data shows a clear gap in measured evidence: the Radeon 740M has verified results, while the N1 16SM does not. Any direct performance comparison must therefore rely on architectural and specification differences rather than empirical scores.

Architecture Differences

The two integrated graphics processors come from different manufacturers and use fundamentally different designs. The AMD Radeon 740M is built on the Phoenix2 chip with RDNA 3.0 architecture, belonging to the Navi III IGP generation. It uses a 4 nm process at TSMC, with 20,900 million transistors on a 137 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 152.6 million transistors per square millimeter. The NVIDIA N1 16SM uses the GB20B chip with Blackwell 2.0 architecture, part of the Blackwell IGP generation. It is fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC, with a die size of 382 mm² and an unknown transistor count, so density cannot be computed.

The compute resources differ substantially. The Radeon 740M has 256 shading units, 16 texture mapping units, 8 render output units, and 4 ray tracing cores. The N1 16SM has 2,048 shading units, 128 TMUs, 24 ROPs, and 16 ray tracing cores. The NVIDIA part also includes 64 tensor cores, while the AMD part has no tensor core count listed. These numbers indicate that the N1 16SM has eight times the shading units and TMUs, three times the ROPs, and four times the ray tracing cores compared to the 740M.

Clock behavior also differs. The Radeon 740M runs a base clock of 800 MHz and a boost clock of 2,800 MHz. The N1 16SM has a lower base clock of 741 MHz and a lower boost clock of 2,346 MHz. Despite the lower clocks, the N1 16SM’s much larger shader count produces higher throughput rates. The pixel rate for the Radeon is 22.40 GPixel/s, while the N1 16SM reaches 56.30 GPixel/s. Texture rate stands at 44.80 GTexel/s for the AMD part against 300.3 GTexel/s for the NVIDIA part. FP32 compute is 2.867 TFLOPS for the Radeon and 9.609 TFLOPS for the N1 16SM, with both parts offering FP16 at a 1:1 ratio to FP32.

Memory architecture is another major divergence. The Radeon 740M uses system shared memory, with type, bus width, and bandwidth all listed as system dependent. The N1 16SM has 128 GB of dedicated LPDDR5X memory on a 256-bit bus, with a memory clock of 1,067 MHz and 8.5 Gbps effective data rate, producing 273.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The AMD part has no fixed memory specification because it relies on the host system’s RAM.

Interface and display outputs also differ. The Radeon 740M connects via PCIe 4.0 x8, while the N1 16SM uses PCIe 5.0 x16. Display outputs for the AMD part are motherboard dependent, whereas the NVIDIA part lists 1x HDMI. Both are integrated graphics with no power connectors and an IGP slot width. The Radeon has a listed TDP of 45 W, while the N1 16SM has an unknown TDP.

API support is a notable contrast. The Radeon 740M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The N1 16SM lists DirectX as N/A, OpenGL as N/A, and Vulkan as N/A. This suggests that the database has no recorded API compatibility for the NVIDIA part, which may reflect its early status or a different software stack.

Release timing places the two parts far apart. The Radeon 740M was released on January 30, 2024, with a predecessor listed as Navi II IGP and a successor as Navi III IGP. The N1 16SM has a release date of May 31, 2026, with no predecessor or successor recorded. The production status for both is active.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 performance?

A: The NVIDIA N1 16SM delivers 9.609 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, which is more than three times the 2.867 TFLOPS of the AMD Radeon 740M.

Q: How does memory differ between the two?

A: The Radeon 740M uses system shared memory with bandwidth dependent on the host system. The N1 16SM has 128 GB of LPDDR5X memory on a 256-bit bus with 273.2 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: Are there any benchmark scores for the NVIDIA N1 16SM?

A: No. The database contains no benchmark entries for the N1 16SM, so its average score is zero and its percentile is 50. The Radeon 740M has recorded scores of 10,172 in OpenCL and 15,568 in Vulkan.

Q: What is the transistor density of each chip?

A: The Radeon 740M has 20,900 million transistors on a 137 mm² die, giving a density of 152.6 million transistors per square millimeter. The N1 16SM has an unknown transistor count on a 382 mm² die, so density cannot be calculated.

Q: What process nodes are used?

A: The AMD part uses a 4 nm process at TSMC. The NVIDIA part uses a 5 nm process at TSMC.

Q: Which part has tensor cores?

A: Only the NVIDIA N1 16SM lists tensor cores, with 64 units. The AMD Radeon 740M has no tensor core count recorded.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two parts based on the database records:

• Architecture: RDNA 3.0 versus Blackwell 2.0
• Chip: Phoenix2 versus GB20B
• Generation: Navi III IGP versus Blackwell IGP
• Process node: 4 nm versus 5 nm
• Transistors: 20,900 million versus unknown
• Die size: 137 mm² versus 382 mm²
• Transistor density: 152.6M per mm² versus not calculated
• Base clock: 800 MHz versus 741 MHz
• Boost clock: 2,800 MHz versus 2,346 MHz
• Memory size: System Shared versus 128 GB
• Memory type: System Shared versus LPDDR5X
• Memory bus width: System Shared versus 256 bit
• Memory bandwidth: System Dependent versus 273.2 GB/s
• Shading units: 256 versus 2,048
• TMUs: 16 versus 128
• ROPs: 8 versus 24
• Ray tracing cores: 4 versus 16
• Tensor cores: not listed versus 64
• Pixel rate: 22.40 GPixel/s versus 56.30 GPixel/s
• Texture rate: 44.80 GTexel/s versus 300.3 GTexel/s
• FP32: 2.867 TFLOPS versus 9.609 TFLOPS
• FP16: 2.867 TFLOPS versus 9.609 TFLOPS
• TDP: 45 W versus unknown
• Bus interface: PCIe 4.0 x8 versus PCIe 5.0 x16
• Display outputs: Motherboard Dependent versus 1x HDMI
• DirectX: 12 Ultimate (12_2) versus N/A
• OpenGL: 4.6 versus N/A
• Vulkan: 1.4 versus N/A
• Release date: 2024-01-30 versus 2026-05-31
• Predecessor: Navi II IGP versus none
• Successor: Navi III IGP versus none
• Benchmark scores: 10,172 and 15,568 versus none
• Percentile: 53 versus 50
• Average score: 12,870 versus 0
• Nearest rivals: four listed versus none

The Verdict

The data indicates that the NVIDIA N1 16SM has a substantially larger compute configuration on paper. Its 2,048 shading units, 128 TMUs, 24 ROPs, and 16 ray tracing cores outnumber the Radeon 740M’s 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, 8 ROPs, and 4 ray tracing cores by wide margins. The N1 16SM also offers 9.609 TFLOPS of FP32 performance against 2.867 TFLOPS, a 3.35x advantage. Its dedicated 128 GB LPDDR5X memory with 273.2 GB/s bandwidth removes the dependency on system RAM that the Radeon 740M carries.

However, the N1 16SM has no measured benchmark results in the database. Its percentile of 50 and average score of zero reflect missing data, not verified performance. The Radeon 740M has concrete scores that place it at the 53rd percentile, with its nearest rivals all within 0.4% of its average. The AMD part also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the NVIDIA part has no recorded API support.

For buyers or system integrators relying on measured performance, the Radeon 740M is the only one of the two with empirical evidence in the database. Its scores are consistent with a mid-range integrated GPU that sits close to older discrete cards like the Radeon RX 580, Radeon Pro 455, FirePro W5100, and GeForce GTX 590. The N1 16SM, despite its theoretical advantages in shader count, memory capacity, and bandwidth, cannot be ranked against the 740M without benchmark submissions.

The choice depends on whether the user prioritizes verified results or stated specifications. The Radeon 740M delivers known performance with a 45 W TDP and a 2024 release date. The N1 16SM, with a 2026 release date, a 382 mm² die, and 64 tensor cores, appears designed for a different performance class, but the database has no numbers to confirm that expectation. Until benchmark data is recorded, the N1 16SM remains a specification sheet without a score, while the Radeon 740M stands as the only part in this comparison with validated output.