AMD Radeon 8040S vs Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded data places the AMD Radeon 8040S and Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile in fundamentally different performance tiers. The AMD part holds a decisive advantage across every benchmark category where both have recorded scores, though the Intel part has no recorded benchmark entries in the database at all.

The AMD Radeon 8040S delivers a Passmark G3D score of 10,578, placing it in the 17th percentile of all GPUs. Its average benchmark score across all tests is 2,440. The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile has no benchmark scores recorded, making direct quantitative comparison impossible in the usual sense. However, the available specifications and the AMD part's percentile ranking tell a clear story.

The AMD Radeon 8040S wins in every workload category represented in its benchmark suite. Its Passmark DirectX 9 score of 134 far exceeds its DirectX 10 score of 48 and DirectX 11 score of 80, indicating a strong legacy API performance profile. The DirectX 12 score of 47 is the lowest among its API tests, which is notable for a part that supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). The Passmark G2D score of 1,052 and GPU compute score of 5,138 round out a part that is clearly designed for general 3D rendering and compute workloads rather than specialized tasks.

The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile, with its 192 shading units, 12 texture mapping units, and 4 render output units, is a low-power integrated solution. Its boost clock of 1000 MHz and 6 W TDP position it as an efficiency-focused part. The 50th percentile ranking among all GPUs, despite having no recorded benchmark scores, suggests the database treats it as a mid-tier entry, but without measured data, its actual performance cannot be verified.

The wins distribution shows the AMD Radeon 8040S with 0 wins and the Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile with 0 wins, indicating that the head-to-head benchmark dataset is empty. This means the analysis must rely on the AMD part's absolute scores and the architectural differences between the two.

The Verdict

The data indicates that the AMD Radeon 8040S is the stronger performer by a substantial margin, though the comparison is limited by the absence of Intel benchmark scores. The AMD part's 10,578 Passmark G3D score and 5,734 TFLOPS FP32 throughput dwarf the Intel part's 384.0 GFLOPS FP32 figure, a ratio of roughly 15 to 1. The AMD part also has vastly higher pixel throughput at 89.60 GPixel/s versus 4.000 GPixel/s, and texture throughput at 179.2 GTexel/s versus 12.00 GTexel/s.

For users running DirectX 9-era workloads or general 3D rendering, the AMD Radeon 8040S is the clear choice. Its DirectX 9 score of 134 is its strongest API result, and its 1,052 G2D score indicates solid 2D performance. The GPU compute score of 5,138 shows meaningful compute capability for a mobile integrated part.

The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile, with no recorded benchmarks, cannot be recommended for any performance-sensitive workload based on the available data. Its specifications suggest it is suited for basic display output and light 2D tasks, but the database contains no measured evidence of its capabilities.

The AMD part's 17th percentile ranking among all GPUs places it below the majority of discrete graphics solutions, but within the integrated GPU space, its specifications are robust. The nearest rivals in the database include the NVIDIA GeForce 710M with an average score of 2,433, only 0.3% behind the AMD part, and the Intel HD Graphics 610 at 2,425, 0.6% behind. These close margins indicate that the AMD Radeon 8040S sits in a competitive cluster of entry-level parts.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no head-to-head benchmark entries between the AMD Radeon 8040S and Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile. The wins counters for both parts are zero, and the head-to-head benchmark array is empty. This absence of direct comparison data means the analysis must derive conclusions from the AMD part's standalone scores and the Intel part's specification sheet.

The AMD Radeon 8040S achieves 5,734 TFLOPS FP32 throughput, while the Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile achieves 384.0 GFLOPS. This represents a 14.9 times advantage for the AMD part. In FP16, the AMD part maintains 5,734 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, while the Intel part reaches 768.0 GFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, meaning the AMD part's FP16 output is 7.5 times higher.

Pixel throughput shows an even wider gap. The AMD part renders at 89.60 GPixel/s, while the Intel part manages 4.000 GPixel/s, a 22.4 times difference. Texture throughput follows a similar pattern: 179.2 GTexel/s versus 12.00 GTexel/s, a 14.9 times difference.

The AMD part's shading unit count of 1,024 is more than five times the Intel part's 192. The texture mapping unit count of 64 versus 12, and render output unit count of 32 versus 4, reinforce the AMD part's architectural superiority in raw throughput terms.

Clock speeds also favor the AMD part. Its base clock of 1,295 MHz and boost clock of 2,800 MHz compare to the Intel part's 300 MHz base and 1,000 MHz boost. The AMD part's boost clock is 2.8 times higher than the Intel part's.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher Passmark G3D score?

A: The AMD Radeon 8040S has a Passmark G3D score of 10,578. The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile has no recorded G3D score in the database.

Q: How do the FP32 throughput figures compare between the two GPUs?

A: The AMD Radeon 8040S delivers 5,734 TFLOPS FP32, while the Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile delivers 384.0 GFLOPS. The AMD part is approximately 15 times faster in FP32 compute.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two parts?

A: The AMD Radeon 8040S has a TDP of 55 W, while the Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile has a TDP of 6 W. The Intel part consumes significantly less power.

Q: Which GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate?

A: Only the AMD Radeon 8040S supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile supports DirectX 12 (12_1), which is a lower feature level.

Q: Are there any recorded head-to-head benchmark results between these two GPUs?

A: No. The database contains zero head-to-head benchmark entries between the AMD Radeon 8040S and Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile.

Q: How does the AMD Radeon 8040S rank among all GPUs?

A: The AMD Radeon 8040S is in the 17th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce 710M with an average score of 2,433, just 0.3% behind.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural families. The AMD Radeon 8040S uses the RDNA 3.5 architecture on a 4 nm process node fabricated by TSMC. The chip is named Strix Halo and belongs to the Navi Mobile (RX 8000M) generation. The Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile uses the Xe-LP architecture on a 10 nm process node fabricated by Intel. Its chip is named Twin Lake and belongs to the HD Graphics-T (Twin Lake) generation.

The AMD part integrates 1,024 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 32 render output units. It also includes 16 ray tracing cores, making it a hardware ray tracing capable part. The Intel part has 192 shading units, 12 texture mapping units, and 4 render output units, with no ray tracing cores listed.

The AMD part has a die size of 308 mm², while the Intel part's die size is unknown. Both parts use system shared memory, with bandwidth dependent on the host system. The AMD part's memory clock is listed as system shared, and the Intel part's memory clock is also system shared.

In terms of API support, the AMD part offers DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Intel part offers DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The key difference is the DirectX feature level, where AMD supports the higher 12_2 standard.

The AMD part is built on a PCIe 5.0 x16 bus interface, while the Intel part uses a Ring Bus interface. Both are integrated graphics processors (IGP) with portable device dependent display outputs.

Specification Differences

The core specification differences between the AMD Radeon 8040S and Intel Graphics 24EU Mobile are substantial. The AMD part operates at a base clock of 1,295 MHz and boost clock of 2,800 MHz, while the Intel part runs at 300 MHz base and 1,000 MHz boost.

The shading unit count differs by a factor of more than five: 1,024 versus 192. Texture mapping units are 64 versus 12, and render output units are 32 versus 4. The AMD part includes 16 ray tracing cores, while the Intel part has none listed.

Pixel rate is 89.60 GPixel/s for the AMD part versus 4.000 GPixel/s for the Intel part. Texture rate is 179.2 GTexel/s versus 12.00 GTexel/s. FP32 throughput is 5,734 TFLOPS versus 384.0 GFLOPS. FP16 throughput is 5,734 TFLOPS (1:1) for AMD versus 768.0 GFLOPS (2:1) for Intel.

The TDP difference is significant: 55 W for the AMD part versus 6 W for the Intel part. Both are classified as IGP with no power connectors required. The AMD part uses a PCIe 5.0 x16 bus interface, while the Intel part uses a Ring Bus.

Process technology differs as well: 4 nm TSMC for AMD versus 10 nm Intel for the Intel part. The AMD part has a die size of 308 mm², while the Intel part's die size is unknown. The AMD part was released on January 5, 2025, while the Intel part was released on December 31, 2024.

The AMD part's predecessor is listed as Polaris Mobile, and it has no successor. The Intel part has no predecessor or successor listed. Both parts are currently marked as Active in production status.