AMD Radeon 780M vs NVIDIA Rubin GPU Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded benchmark data splits these two parts cleanly, but not because they compete head to head. The AMD Radeon 780M has three benchmark entries in the database: a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 480, a Geekbench OpenCL score of 18,602, and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 33,683. The NVIDIA Rubin GPU has no benchmark entries at all, so its average benchmark score is recorded as 0. The 780M therefore holds every measured benchmark win by default, with the Rubin GPU offering no recorded performance data to compare against.

The 780M's average benchmark score of 17,588 places it at the 61st percentile among all GPUs in the database. That percentile position matters because it shows where the integrated part sits relative to the full field. The Rubin GPU sits at the 50th percentile, which is a neutral midpoint, but that position comes from having zero recorded scores rather than from measured performance.

The nearest rival data for the 780M puts its average score in context. The AMD Radeon Pro 560 averages 17,551, which is 0.2% below the 780M. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 averages 17,639, 0.3% above. The AMD Radeon HD 7790 averages 17,666, 0.4% above, and the AMD Radeon Pro 460 averages 17,509, 0.5% below. These deltas are all under one percentage point, which indicates the 780M's average score sits in a tightly packed cluster. The Rubin GPU has no nearest rivals listed, so there is no comparable score cluster for it.

The use-case split is therefore lopsided in the database. For any workload that relies on the three recorded benchmark tests, the 780M is the only part with measured results. The Rubin GPU cannot be said to win anything in the recorded data because no test was logged for it. The 780M wins on 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, Geekbench OpenCL, and Geekbench Vulkan by default.

Architecture Differences

The two parts differ at nearly every architectural level. The 780M uses the Phoenix chip with RDNA 3.0 architecture, belongs to the Navi III IGP generation, and is built on TSMC's 4 nm process. The Rubin GPU uses the GR100 chip with Rubin architecture, belongs to the Server Rubin (Rxx) generation, and is built on TSMC's 3 nm process. The node difference gives the Rubin GPU a density advantage: 230.8M transistors per mm² versus 142.6M per mm² for the 780M.

Transistor counts are far apart. The 780M has 25,390 million transistors on a 178 mm² die. The Rubin GPU has 336,000 million transistors on a 1,456 mm² die. That is roughly 13 times the transistor count and roughly 8 times the die area. The Rubin GPU's transistor density is higher despite the larger die, which reflects the tighter 3 nm process.

Shader and texture hardware differs substantially. The 780M has 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 32 raster output pipelines. The Rubin GPU has 28,672 shading units, 896 texture mapping units, and only 24 raster output pipelines. The 780M has 12 ray tracing cores; the Rubin GPU has no ray tracing core count listed. The Rubin GPU has 896 tensor cores; the 780M has no tensor core count listed.

Clock behavior is also different. The 780M runs at an 800 MHz base and a 2,900 MHz boost. The Rubin GPU runs at a 700 MHz base and a 2,267 MHz boost. The 780M has the higher boost clock by a wide margin, but the Rubin GPU compensates with far more execution units.

Memory architecture separates the two completely. The 780M uses system shared memory, with the bus width, memory type, and bandwidth all listed as system dependent. The Rubin GPU uses 288 GB of HBM4 on a 16,384-bit bus with 22.1 TB/s of bandwidth and a memory clock of 2,695 MHz, 10.8 Gbps effective. The 780M has no dedicated memory pool; the Rubin GPU has a massive dedicated one.

Power and physical configuration differ sharply. The 780M has a 15 W TDP, is an IGP with no power connectors, and uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface. The Rubin GPU has a 2,300 W TDP, is an SXM Module, and uses a PCIe 6.0 x16 interface with a suggested PSU of 2,700 W. Display output also differs: the 780M's outputs are motherboard dependent, while the Rubin GPU has no outputs.

API support is another split. The 780M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Rubin GPU lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan, which reflects its server-oriented role rather than a client graphics part.

The Verdict

The database shows two parts built for different purposes. The 780M is a 15 W integrated graphics processor from the Navi III IGP generation, released on 2024-01-30, with measured benchmark scores and a 61st percentile ranking. The Rubin GPU is a 2,300 W server SXM module from the Server Rubin generation, released on 2025-12-31, with no recorded benchmarks and a 50th percentile placeholder.

For anyone selecting based on recorded data, the 780M is the only part with proven benchmark results. Its average score of 17,588 places it within 0.5% of several discrete GPUs from both AMD and NVIDIA, which suggests the integrated part delivers performance in the same general range as those older discrete cards. The nearest rival deltas, all under one percentage point, show the 780M's score cluster is extremely tight.

The Rubin GPU cannot be evaluated on measured performance because the database contains no benchmark entries for it. Its role as a server part with no display outputs, HBM4 memory, and tensor cores indicates a compute-oriented design, but the recorded data does not quantify that compute capability. The 780M also has no tensor cores, while the Rubin GPU has 896, but without benchmark scores the practical impact of that difference cannot be measured from the database.

The verdict from the data is straightforward: the 780M wins every recorded benchmark because it is the only part with recorded benchmarks. The Rubin GPU is the newer release, the larger chip, and the higher transistor count part, but none of that translates into a benchmark score in the database.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon 780M has an average benchmark score of 17,588. The NVIDIA Rubin GPU has an average benchmark score of 0 because no benchmarks are recorded for it.

Q: How does the 780M compare to its nearest rivals in average score?

A: The 780M's average score of 17,588 is 0.2% above the AMD Radeon Pro 560, 0.3% below the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060, 0.4% below the AMD Radeon HD 7790, and 0.5% above the AMD Radeon Pro 460.

Q: What process nodes do the two GPUs use?

A: The AMD Radeon 780M uses TSMC's 4 nm process. The NVIDIA Rubin GPU uses TSMC's 3 nm process.

Q: What memory configurations do the two GPUs have?

A: The 780M uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth. The Rubin GPU has 288 GB of HBM4 memory on a 16,384-bit bus with 22.1 TB/s bandwidth.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same graphics APIs?

A: No. The 780M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Rubin GPU lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan.

Q: What are the TDP values for each GPU?

A: The 780M has a 15 W TDP. The Rubin GPU has a 2,300 W TDP with a suggested PSU of 2,700 W.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

There are no head-to-head benchmark entries in the database for these two parts. The recorded data instead consists of three standalone benchmarks for the 780M and none for the Rubin GPU. The largest wins in either direction are therefore the 780M's three logged scores.

The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test gives the 780M a score of 480. That is the only DX12 result recorded for either part. The Geekbench OpenCL test gives the 780M 18,602, and the Geekbench Vulkan test gives it 33,683. The Vulkan score is the highest of the three, which indicates the 780M's RDNA 3.0 architecture handles Vulkan workloads more strongly than the other two tests in the database.

The Rubin GPU has no scores in any of these tests. Its average benchmark score is 0, and its nearest rivals list is empty. There is no delta percentage to compute for the Rubin GPU against the 780M because no rival relationship is recorded.

The 780M's percentile of 61 versus the Rubin GPU's 50 also reflects the absence of Rubin data. A 50th percentile with a zero average score is a positional default, not a measured outcome. The 780M's 61st percentile comes from its actual average score of 17,588.

The 780M's nearest rival deltas provide the only head-to-head style comparisons in the database. The largest positive delta is 0.5% over the AMD Radeon Pro 460. The largest negative delta is 0.4% behind the AMD Radeon HD 7790. These margins are small, but they are the only measured comparisons available for the 780M.

Specification Differences

The database records several specification fields where the two parts differ, and only those fields belong in this comparison.

Process node: 780M uses 4 nm, Rubin GPU uses 3 nm, both from TSMC.

Transistors: 780M has 25,390 million, Rubin GPU has 336,000 million.

Die size: 780M is 178 mm², Rubin GPU is 1,456 mm².

Transistor density: 780M is 142.6M per mm², Rubin GPU is 230.8M per mm².

Base clock: 780M is 800 MHz, Rubin GPU is 700 MHz.

Boost clock: 780M is 2,900 MHz, Rubin GPU is 2,267 MHz.

Memory clock: 780M is system shared, Rubin GPU is 2,695 MHz, 10.8 Gbps effective.

Memory size: 780M is system shared, Rubin GPU is 288 GB.

Memory type: 780M is system shared, Rubin GPU is HBM4.

Memory bus width: 780M is system shared, Rubin GPU is 16,384 bit.

Memory bandwidth: 780M is system dependent, Rubin GPU is 22.1 TB/s.

Shading units: 780M has 768, Rubin GPU has 28,672.

Texture mapping units: 780M has 48, Rubin GPU has 896.

Raster output pipelines: 780M has 32, Rubin GPU has 24.

Ray tracing cores: 780M has 12, Rubin GPU has none listed.

Tensor cores: 780M has none listed, Rubin GPU has 896.

Pixel rate: 780M is 92.80 GPixel/s, Rubin GPU is 54.41 GPixel/s.

Texture rate: 780M is 139.2 GTexel/s, Rubin GPU is 2,031.2 GTexel/s.

FP32 performance: 780M is 8.909 TFLOPS, Rubin GPU is 130.0 TFLOPS.

FP16 performance: 780M is 8.909 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, Rubin GPU is 260.0 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio.

TDP: 780M is 15 W, Rubin GPU is 2,300 W.

Suggested PSU: 780M has none listed, Rubin GPU is 2,700 W.

Slot width: 780M is IGP, Rubin GPU is SXM Module.

Power connectors: 780M has none, Rubin GPU has none listed.

Bus interface: 780M is PCIe 4.0 x8, Rubin GPU is PCIe 6.0 x16.

Display outputs: 780M is motherboard dependent, Rubin GPU has no outputs.

DirectX support: 780M is 12 Ultimate (12_2), Rubin GPU is N/A.

OpenGL support: 780M is 4.6, Rubin GPU is N/A.

Vulkan support: 780M is 1.4, Rubin GPU is N/A.

Release date: 780M is 2024-01-30, Rubin GPU is 2025-12-31.

Generation: 780M is Navi III IGP (Phoenix), Rubin GPU is Server Rubin (Rxx).

Predecessor: 780M lists Navi II IGP, Rubin GPU lists Server Blackwell.

Successor: 780M lists Navi III IGP, Rubin GPU lists none.

Production status: both are listed as Active.

The specification split shows a client integrated GPU with modest resources and a server module with extreme resources. The 780M wins on pixel rate, boost clock, and base clock. The Rubin GPU wins on transistor count, die size, density, memory capacity, bandwidth, shading units, texture units, tensor cores, FP32 throughput, FP16 throughput, and TDP. The absence of recorded Rubin benchmarks means these specifications cannot be tied to measured performance in the database.