AMD Radeon 760M vs NVIDIA N1 16SM Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data presents an unusual comparison. The AMD Radeon 760M has a full suite of benchmark scores, while the NVIDIA N1 16SM has no recorded benchmark scores in the database. Consequently, there are no head-to-head benchmark entries, and neither product registers a win in direct comparisons. The available evidence for the Radeon 760M comes from ten distinct tests. Its average benchmark score is 6019, placing it at the 35th percentile of all GPUs. The N1 16SM, by contrast, has an average benchmark score of 0 and sits at the 50th percentile, a percentile figure that derives from its specifications rather than any measured performance.

The Radeon 760M's individual scores show a clear spread across different test types. In 3DMark Steel Nomad (DX12), it records 400 points. Its Geekbench OpenCL score is 20255, and its Geekbench Vulkan score is 30336. PassMark results vary widely: DirectX 10 yields 19 points, DirectX 11 yields 52, DirectX 12 yields 25, and DirectX 9 yields 65. The PassMark G2D score is 890, while the PassMark G3D score is 5310. The PassMark GPU Compute score is 2840.

Without any benchmark data for the N1 16SM, the nearest rivals for the Radeon 760M provide context. The Radeon 760M sits 0.3% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 6400, whose average score is 6001. It also sits 0.3% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770M, which scores 6000. Against the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server, the Radeon 760M is 0.4% ahead, as that card scores 5996. The NVIDIA Quadro P2000, however, scores 6049, placing the Radeon 760M 0.5% behind it. These deltas are minimal, indicating the Radeon 760M performs in a tightly clustered band around the 6000-point average mark.

The Verdict

The data indicates the Radeon 760M is a measured, active product with a defined performance profile. Its 35th percentile standing among all GPUs suggests it is a mid-to-lower tier part, and its average score of 6019 aligns closely with several discrete and older mobile GPUs. The N1 16SM, however, has no benchmark results, no average score, and no nearest rivals. The database records its percentile as 50, but this figure is not backed by any performance measurements.

Users seeking a product with verified performance data should consider the Radeon 760M. The benchmarks show it can handle DirectX 11 workloads with a PassMark score of 52, and its Vulkan score of 30336 indicates strong API efficiency. The N1 16SM cannot be compared on performance terms because no scores exist. The Radeon 760M is the only option here with actionable data. The N1 16SM remains a specification sheet without measured results, so any judgment on its speed is unsupported by the database.

Architecture Differences

The two products come from different architectural generations. The Radeon 760M uses the Phoenix chip with RDNA 3.0 architecture, part of the Navi III IGP generation. The N1 16SM uses the GB20B chip with Blackwell 2.0 architecture, part of the Blackwell IGP (N1x) generation. The Radeon 760M is built on a 4 nm process at TSMC, while the N1 16SM uses a 5 nm process, also at TSMC. The Radeon 760M has a transistor count of 25,390 million and a die size of 178 mm², giving a transistor density of 142.6 million per mm². The N1 16SM has an unknown transistor count but a larger die size of 382 mm², with no density figure recorded.

The Radeon 760M 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 the N1 16SM either lacks these APIs or they are unimplemented in the current driver stack. The Radeon 760M also has a predecessor listed as Navi II IGP, while the N1 16SM has no predecessor recorded.

The Radeon 760M uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 bus interface, while the N1 16SM uses PCIe 5.0 x16. The Radeon 760M has 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 raster operation pipelines. It includes 8 ray tracing cores and no tensor cores. The N1 16SM has 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 24 ROPs. It includes 16 ray tracing cores and 64 tensor cores. These are stark differences in raw compute resources, with the N1 16SM holding a fourfold advantage in shading units and TMUs, and a 50% advantage in ROPs.

Specification Differences

The Radeon 760M has a base clock of 800 MHz and a boost clock of 2599 MHz. The N1 16SM has a base clock of 741 MHz and a boost clock of 2346 MHz. The Radeon 760M's memory is system shared with a system-dependent bandwidth. The N1 16SM has 128 GB of LPDDR5X memory on a 256-bit bus, with a bandwidth of 273.2 GB/s and a memory clock of 1067 MHz (8.5 Gbps effective). The Radeon 760M's pixel rate is 41.58 GPixel/s, while the N1 16SM's is 56.30 GPixel/s. Texture rates are 83.17 GTexel/s for the Radeon 760M and 300.3 GTexel/s for the N1 16SM.

FP32 performance for the Radeon 760M is 5.323 TFLOPS, and FP16 is also 5.323 TFLOPS (1:1). The N1 16SM delivers 9.609 TFLOPS in both FP32 and FP16 (1:1). The Radeon 760M has a TDP of 15 W, while the N1 16SM's TDP is unknown. Both are IGP slot width with no power connectors. The Radeon 760M's display outputs are motherboard dependent, while the N1 16SM has one HDMI output. The Radeon 760M released on 2024-01-30, and the N1 16SM releases on 2026-05-31. Neither has a launch MSRP recorded.

FAQ

Q: Which product has a higher FP32 compute throughput?

A: The NVIDIA N1 16SM delivers 9.609 TFLOPS in FP32, compared to the AMD Radeon 760M's 5.323 TFLOPS. The N1 16SM is approximately 80% higher in this metric.

Q: What is the memory configuration of the NVIDIA N1 16SM?

A: The N1 16SM uses 128 GB of LPDDR5X memory on a 256-bit bus, with a bandwidth of 273.2 GB/s. The Radeon 760M uses system shared memory with a bandwidth that is system dependent.

Q: Does the Radeon 760M support DirectX 12 Ultimate?

A: Yes, the Radeon 760M lists DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) as a supported API. The N1 16SM lists DirectX as N/A in the database.

Q: How does the Radeon 760M compare to the NVIDIA Quadro P2000 in average benchmark score?

A: The Radeon 760M has an average benchmark score of 6019, while the Quadro P2000 scores 6049. The Radeon 760M is 0.5% behind the Quadro P2000.

Q: What process nodes do these products use?

A: The Radeon 760M is fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC, while the N1 16SM uses a 5 nm process, also at TSMC.

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

A: No. The database lists no benchmarks for the N1 16SM, and its average benchmark score is 0.

Where Each One Wins

The Radeon 760M wins in the domain of measured, available performance data. It has ten benchmark results, an average score of 6019, and a percentile rank of 35. Its Vulkan score of 30336 is its strongest recorded result, indicating solid API-level performance. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 20255 also shows respectable compute capability. For anyone relying on empirical results, the Radeon 760M is the only product with evidence.

The N1 16SM wins on paper specifications. It has more shading units (2048 vs 512), more TMUs (128 vs 32), more ROPs (24 vs 16), more ray tracing cores (16 vs 8), and 64 tensor cores, which the Radeon 760M lacks entirely. Its FP32 throughput of 9.609 TFLOPS exceeds the Radeon 760M's 5.323 TFLOPS. Its memory subsystem is clearly superior: 128 GB of LPDDR5X at 273.2 GB/s versus system shared memory. Its pixel rate of 56.30 GPixel/s and texture rate of 300.3 GTexel/s both surpass the Radeon 760M's respective rates of 41.58 GPixel/s and 83.17 GTexel/s. The N1 16SM also uses a newer PCIe 5.0 x16 interface, double the lane width and one generation newer than the Radeon 760M's PCIe 4.0 x8.

The N1 16SM's 50th percentile ranking, despite having no benchmarks, suggests its specifications alone place it at the median of all GPUs. The Radeon 760M's 35th percentile is based on measured scores. The release dates also differ: the Radeon 760M came out on 2024-01-30, while the N1 16SM is scheduled for 2026-05-31. The Radeon 760M has a predecessor in the Navi II IGP, while the N1 16SM has none recorded.

In direct application terms, the Radeon 760M's DirectX 12 Ultimate support and Vulkan 1.4 support make it usable in current gaming and compute environments. The N1 16SM's N/A API listings mean software compatibility is unverified. The N1 16SM's tensor cores and ray tracing cores suggest it is designed for AI and ray-traced workloads, but without benchmark confirmations, those remain theoretical advantages. The Radeon 760M's 15 W TDP is a known quantity, whereas the N1 16SM's power draw is unknown. For deployment decisions, the Radeon 760M offers certainty in performance and power, while the N1 16SM offers specification-based headroom that lacks empirical validation.