AMD Radeon 8060S vs AMD Radeon 840M Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon 8060S and the AMD Radeon 840M occupy entirely different tiers within the mobile graphics landscape. The 8060S is a large, high-performance integrated graphics processor built on the Strix Halo chip, while the 840M is a compact IGP from the Krackan Point chip. The recorded data shows that the 8060S carries a percentile ranking of 87 against all GPUs, placing it in the upper tier of the database. The 840M, by contrast, sits at the 50th percentile, which represents the median of all recorded graphics solutions.

The 8060S delivers its wins across compute-heavy workloads. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 84,626 and Vulkan score of 80,483 indicate strong general-purpose compute performance. The 840M has no recorded benchmark entries in the database, so its standing rests on architectural specifications rather than measured results. The 8060S also wins decisively in raw throughput metrics. Its pixel rate of 185.6 GPixel/s is roughly eight times higher than the 23.20 GPixel/s of the 840M. Texture rate follows the same pattern, with the 8060S delivering 464.0 GTexel/s against 46.40 GTexel/s.

For scenarios that stress shading units, ray tracing cores, and fill rate, the 8060S is the clear choice. The 840M, with its 15 W TDP, targets low-power portable devices where efficiency matters more than absolute performance. Its 256 shading units and 8 ROPs are sufficient for basic graphics tasks but place it far behind the 8060S in every measurable dimension.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs share the RDNA 3.5 architecture and are manufactured by AMD on TSMC's 4 nm process. The similarity ends there. The 8060S uses the Strix Halo chip with a die size of 308 mm², while the 840M uses the Krackan Point chip with an unknown die size. The 8060S generation is listed as Navi Mobile (RX 8000M), whereas the 840M belongs to the Navi III IGP (Strix Point Mobile) generation.

The compute resource disparity is substantial. The 8060S packs 2,560 shading units, 160 texture mapping units, 64 ROPs, and 40 ray tracing cores. The 840M contains 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, 8 ROPs, and 4 ray tracing cores. This represents a 10x difference in shading units and TMUs, and an 8x difference in ROPs and ray tracing cores. The FP32 compute throughput reflects this gap: the 8060S achieves 14.85 TFLOPS, while the 840M delivers 1,484.8 GFLOPS. Both implement FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, so the half-precision figures mirror the single-precision numbers.

Clock behavior differs as well. The 8060S has a base clock of 1295 MHz and a boost clock of 2900 MHz. The 840M starts at a much lower 400 MHz base but also boosts to 2900 MHz. The lower base clock on the 840M suggests aggressive power management for the 15 W TDP envelope, whereas the 8060S operates within a 55 W TDP. The 8060S uses a PCIe 5.0 x16 bus interface, while the 840M uses PCIe 4.0 x8. Both rely on system shared memory with bandwidth described as system dependent, and neither has dedicated VRAM.

The release timeline shows the 8060S launched on 2025-01-05, followed by the 840M on 2025-02-28. The 8060S lists Polaris Mobile as its predecessor, while the 840M succeeds Navi II IGP. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Neither uses power connectors, and both are classified as IGP slot width devices with portable-device-dependent display outputs.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark entries between the 8060S and the 840M. The 840M has no recorded benchmark scores at all, which prevents a direct numerical comparison across identical tests. The 8060S does have three recorded benchmark results. Its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 2,162. Its Geekbench OpenCL score is 84,626, and its Geekbench Vulkan score is 80,483. These figures establish a performance baseline for the 8060S but cannot be matched against the 840M using the same tests.

The 8060S does have nearest rival data that places its performance in context. Its average benchmark score is 55,757. The AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB averages 55,698, which is 0.1% lower. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 averages 56,083, which is 0.6% higher than the 8060S. The AMD Radeon Pro W5700X averages 54,828, putting it 1.7% behind. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 averages 54,247, which is 2.8% behind. These deltas show the 8060S landing within a narrow band around these discrete desktop-class GPUs, slightly ahead of the RX 6750 GRE and the two workstation cards, and marginally behind the RTX 5080.

The 840M has no nearest rival entries in the database, so no such comparison exists for it. Its 50th percentile ranking, however, places it at the median of all GPUs in the database. The 8060S, at the 87th percentile, sits well above that midpoint. The gap between the two is best expressed through the architectural specifications: the 8060S offers roughly ten times the shading units and TMUs, eight times the ROPs and ray tracing cores, and approximately ten times the FP32 throughput. Those ratios, combined with the 55 W versus 15 W TDP split, define the performance envelope of each part.

The Verdict

The data points to two different products for two different roles. The AMD Radeon 8060S is a high-performance IGP that approaches discrete GPU territory. Its average benchmark score of 55,757 places it within 0.6% of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 and ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB by 0.1%. Its 87th percentile ranking among all GPUs confirms that it belongs in the upper performance tier. Any system using the 8060S should be capable of demanding graphics workloads, including ray-traced content given its 40 ray tracing cores.

The AMD Radeon 840M serves a different purpose. Its 15 W TDP and 256 shading units indicate a focus on efficiency and basic graphics acceleration. The 50th percentile ranking places it at the median of the database, which means it is neither a low-end part nor a high-performance one. It is a mainstream IGP suited to everyday computing tasks, light media playback, and modest gaming. The absence of recorded benchmark scores means its exact performance cannot be quantified from the database, but the architectural data shows a part roughly one-tenth the size of the 8060S in compute resources.

For users who prioritize maximum integrated graphics performance, the 8060S is the only choice between these two. For users who prioritize low power consumption and compact systems, the 840M fits that profile. The 55 W TDP of the 8060S versus the 15 W TDP of the 840M represents a 40 W difference that will impact thermal design and battery life in portable devices. The 8060S supports PCIe 5.0 x16, while the 840M uses PCIe 4.0 x8, which also reflects their different positions in the product stack.

FAQ

Q: How does the AMD Radeon 8060S compare to its nearest rivals in average benchmark score?

A: The 8060S averages 55,757. It is 0.1% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB (55,698), 1.7% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro W5700X (54,828), and 2.8% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 (54,247). It trails the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 (56,083) by 0.6%.

Q: What benchmark scores are recorded for the AMD Radeon 840M?

A: The database contains no benchmark entries for the 840M. Its average benchmark score is listed as 0, and it has no nearest rival entries. Its performance can only be assessed through its architectural specifications.

Q: What is the difference in shading units between the two GPUs?

A: The 8060S contains 2,560 shading units, while the 840M contains 256. That is a 10x difference. The 8060S also has 160 TMUs versus 16, 64 ROPs versus 8, and 40 ray tracing cores versus 4.

Q: Do both GPUs use the same architecture and manufacturing process?

A: Yes. Both use the RDNA 3.5 architecture and are built on TSMC's 4 nm process. The 8060S uses the Strix Halo chip with a 308 mm² die, while the 840M uses the Krackan Point chip with an unknown die size.

Q: What are the TDP values for each GPU?

A: The 8060S has a TDP of 55 W, and the 840M has a TDP of 15 W. Both are classified as IGP slot width devices with no power connectors.

Q: How does the FP32 compute throughput compare?

A: The 8060S delivers 14.85 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the 840M delivers 1,484.8 GFLOPS. Both achieve FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32. The 8060S also reaches a pixel rate of 185.6 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 464.0 GTexel/s, versus 23.20 GPixel/s and 46.40 GTexel/s for the 840M.