AMD Radeon 780M vs Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The AMD Radeon 780M and the Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile occupy entirely different performance tiers, and the recorded benchmark data confirms a decisive gap. The AMD Radeon 780M produces an average benchmark score of 17588 across its tested workloads. The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile has an average benchmark score of 0, with no recorded benchmark entries in the database. This is not a close contest; it is a comparison between a fully realized integrated GPU and a minimal execution unit configuration.

Looking at specific tests, the AMD Radeon 780M scores 480 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, 18602 in Geekbench OpenCL, and 33683 in Geekbench Vulkan. The Intel part has no scores in any of these tests. The 780M's Vulkan result of 33683 is particularly telling. It indicates strong compute throughput for an integrated part, especially when compared against its own OpenCL score of 18602. The difference between those two numbers suggests the RDNA 3.0 architecture responds well to Vulkan's lower overhead API model.

The AMD part sits at the 61st percentile among all GPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon Pro 560 at 17551 average score (0.2% behind), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 at 17639 (0.3% ahead), and the AMD Radeon HD 7790 at 17666 (0.4% ahead). These deltas are remarkably small. The 780M is effectively trading blows with a dedicated desktop GPU from a previous generation and sits within half a percent of an RTX 4060 in average score. That places it far above what anyone would expect from a 15 W integrated solution.

The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile has no nearest rivals listed and no percentile data beyond the 50th percentile baseline. With no benchmark scores recorded, the database treats it as an unmeasured entity. The 780M delivers 8.909 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the Intel part manages 384.0 GFLOPS. That is a 23.2x difference in raw floating-point throughput. In real-world terms, the 780M will handle modern game workloads at playable settings, while the Intel 24EU part is suited only to basic desktop compositing and 2D acceleration.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the AMD Radeon 780M than the Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile in FP32 compute?

A: The 780M delivers 8.909 TFLOPS of FP32 performance. The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile delivers 384.0 GFLOPS. The AMD part is roughly 23 times higher in raw FP32 throughput.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon 780M has an average benchmark score of 17588. The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile has an average benchmark score of 0, with no individual benchmark results recorded in the database.

Q: Which GPU supports hardware ray tracing?

A: The AMD Radeon 780M includes 12 RT cores and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile has no RT cores listed and supports only DirectX 12 (12_1), which does not include the full Ultimate feature set.

Q: What is the clock speed range for each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon 780M has a base clock of 800 MHz and a boost clock of 2900 MHz. The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 1000 MHz.

Q: How do the power requirements compare?

A: The AMD Radeon 780M has a TDP of 15 W. The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile has a TDP of 6 W. Both are integrated graphics processors with no dedicated power connectors.

Q: What is the pixel fill rate for each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon 780M achieves 92.80 GPixel/s. The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile achieves 4.000 GPixel/s, a difference of roughly 23x in the AMD part's favor.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD Radeon 780M uses the Phoenix chip built on RDNA 3.0 architecture, manufactured on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile uses the Twin Lake chip with Xe-LP architecture, built on a 10 nm process at Intel. The process node difference alone explains much of the performance gap. A 4 nm process allows significantly more transistors in the same die area, and the 780M uses that advantage aggressively.

The AMD part packs 25,390 million transistors on a 178 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 142.6 million per square millimeter. The Intel part's transistor count and die size are both listed as unknown, so direct density comparison is impossible. However, the known figures for the 780M show a dense, modern implementation. The 780M is part of the Navi III IGP generation for Phoenix, succeeding the Navi II IGP line. The Intel part belongs to the HD Graphics-T generation for Twin Lake.

The execution resources differ dramatically. The 780M has 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. It also includes 12 dedicated RT cores. The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile has 192 shading units, 12 TMUs, and only 4 ROPs. It has no RT cores at all. The ROP count is especially important for rasterization workloads. With 32 ROPs versus 4, the AMD part can complete pixel writes far more efficiently. The texture rate tells a similar story: 139.2 GTexel/s for the 780M versus 12.00 GTexel/s for the Intel part.

Memory architecture is shared in both cases. Both use system shared memory with a system dependent bandwidth figure. Neither has dedicated VRAM. The 780M uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 bus interface, while the Intel part uses a Ring Bus. This reflects the different integration strategies. The AMD IGP connects through a standard PCIe link, while Intel's Twin Lake part uses an internal ring interconnect.

The FP16 capabilities differ in ratio as well. The 780M achieves 8.909 TFLOPS of FP16 with a 1:1 ratio to FP32. The Intel part achieves 768.0 GFLOPS of FP16 with a 2:1 ratio. This means the AMD part does not sacrifice half-precision throughput, while the Intel part offers double-rate FP16 relative to its own FP32. For workloads that rely on FP16 acceleration, the 780M's absolute throughput is still far higher.

API support is another differentiator. The 780M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Intel part supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Both support the latest OpenGL and Vulkan versions, but the 780M's DirectX 12_2 feature level includes ray tracing and mesh shaders. The Intel part's 12_1 level omits those features.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear separation. The AMD Radeon 780M is a high-performance integrated GPU that competes with dedicated discrete cards. Its average benchmark score of 17588 places it at the 61st percentile among all GPUs. It sits within 0.4% of the AMD Radeon HD 7790 and within 0.3% of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 in average score. For an IGP with a 15 W TDP, that is exceptional measured performance.

The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile is a minimal integrated solution. Its 6 W TDP, 192 shading units, and 4 ROPs make it suitable for basic display output and light 2D workloads. With no recorded benchmark scores, there is no quantitative evidence of gaming or compute capability. The 50th percentile ranking appears to be a default placement rather than a measured result.

For anyone selecting between these two parts, the choice depends entirely on the intended use. The 780M delivers measurable performance in DX12, OpenCL, and Vulkan workloads. The Intel part has no measured performance data at all. The 780M is the only one of the two with evidence of handling graphically demanding tasks.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every measurable specification. The AMD Radeon 780M uses a 4 nm process from TSMC, while the Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile uses a 10 nm process from Intel. The AMD part has 25,390 million transistors on a 178 mm² die. The Intel part's transistor count and die size are unknown.

Clock speeds diverge substantially. The 780M runs at 800 MHz base and 2900 MHz boost. The Intel part runs at 300 MHz base and 1000 MHz boost. The AMD boost clock is nearly triple the Intel boost clock.

Execution resources favor the AMD part across the board. The 780M has 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The Intel part has 192 shading units, 12 TMUs, and 4 ROPs. The 780M adds 12 RT cores; the Intel part has none.

Calculated rates reinforce the gap. The 780M achieves 92.80 GPixel/s pixel rate, 139.2 GTexel/s texture rate, and 8.909 TFLOPS FP32. The Intel part achieves 4.000 GPixel/s, 12.00 GTexel/s, and 384.0 GFLOPS FP32. FP16 output is 8.909 TFLOPS for AMD and 768.0 GFLOPS for Intel.

Power and interface also differ. The 780M has a 15 W TDP and uses PCIe 4.0 x8. The Intel part has a 6 W TDP and uses a Ring Bus. The 780M has no power connectors, as expected for an IGP. The Intel part's power connector field is null, also consistent with an integrated design.

API support shows a feature level difference. The 780M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). The Intel part supports DirectX 12 (12_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon 780M wins in every measured category. In compute workloads, its 8.909 TFLOPS FP32 throughput is roughly 23 times the Intel part's 384.0 GFLOPS. In rasterization, its 92.80 GPixel/s pixel rate dwarfs the Intel part's 4.000 GPixel/s. In texture work, 139.2 GTexel/s versus 12.00 GTexel/s represents an order of magnitude advantage.

The 780M also wins on architectural features. It has 12 RT cores for hardware ray tracing, which the Intel part lacks entirely. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, while the Intel part stops at DirectX 12_1. Its 768 shading units provide four times the shader throughput of the Intel part's 192 units.

The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile wins only in power efficiency. Its 6 W TDP is 9 W lower than the 780M's 15 W TDP. For ultra-portable or fanless designs where power draw is the primary constraint, the Intel part offers a lower thermal footprint. Its 10 nm process, while older than AMD's 4 nm node, still enables a functional IGP at very low power.

For gaming, the 780M is the clear choice. Its 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 480, while modest in absolute terms, represents real measurable DX12 performance. The Intel part has no recorded gaming benchmark. For compute applications using OpenCL or Vulkan, the 780M again leads with scores of 18602 and 33683 respectively. The Intel part has no data in either test.

The practical takeaway from the recorded data is straightforward. The AMD Radeon 780M is a genuine low-power gaming and compute solution. The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile is a display adapter with minimal acceleration capabilities. Anyone building a system for light gaming or GPU-accelerated workloads should choose the 780M. Anyone prioritizing absolute minimum power consumption above all other factors may consider the Intel part, but the performance trade-off is severe.