AMD Radeon 8065S vs NVIDIA N1X 40SM Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data for both the AMD Radeon 8065S and the NVIDIA N1X 40SM shows no head-to-head benchmark results, no wins for either part, and no average benchmark scores. Both GPUs sit at the 50th percentile among all GPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of zero. The nearest rival lists are empty for both products, meaning no direct comparative measurements have been cataloged. The absence of benchmark data is the most significant finding: neither GPU has recorded performance metrics that can be used to establish a winner in compute workloads, gaming framerates, or synthetic tests.

The AMD Radeon 8065S delivers 15.36 TFLOPS of FP32 compute and 15.36 TFLOPS of FP16 compute with a 1:1 ratio. The NVIDIA N1X 40SM delivers 24.02 TFLOPS of FP32 and 24.02 TFLOPS of FP16, also at a 1:1 ratio. These figures indicate a substantial raw compute advantage for the NVIDIA part: the N1X 40SM offers approximately 56% more FP32 throughput than the Radeon 8065S. However, these are theoretical peak rates derived from clock speeds and shader counts, not measured application performance.

Pixel throughput tells a different story. The AMD Radeon 8065S achieves 192.0 GPixel/s, while the NVIDIA N1X 40SM achieves 93.84 GPixel/s. The AMD part is more than twice as fast in pixel fill rate, a metric that often matters in rasterization-heavy workloads at high resolutions. Texture rate favors NVIDIA: the N1X 40SM reaches 750.7 GTexel/s against 480.0 GTexel/s for the Radeon 8065S, a 56% advantage for NVIDIA.

Clock behavior differs sharply. The AMD Radeon 8065S runs at a base clock of 1295 MHz and boosts to 3000 MHz. The NVIDIA N1X 40SM runs at a base clock of 741 MHz and boosts to 2346 MHz. The AMD part has a 40% higher boost clock, yet the NVIDIA part still produces more compute throughput because it carries 5120 shading units versus 2560 for AMD. The NVIDIA shader count is exactly double, and the texture mapping units follow the same pattern: 320 TMUs versus 160 TMUs. The ROP count reverses this: AMD has 64 ROPs, NVIDIA has 40 ROPs, which explains the AMD advantage in pixel rate.

Both GPUs include 40 ray tracing cores. The NVIDIA N1X 40SM also includes 160 tensor cores, while the AMD Radeon 8065S has no tensor core count listed in the database. This indicates a structural difference in AI and machine learning acceleration capability, though no benchmark scores exist to quantify the impact.

Memory configuration diverges completely. The AMD Radeon 8065S uses system shared memory, with system dependent bandwidth. The NVIDIA N1X 40SM uses 128 GB of LPDDR5X memory on a 256 bit bus, delivering 273.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The memory clock for NVIDIA is 1067 MHz, 8.5 Gbps effective. AMD has no dedicated memory clock, no dedicated memory size, no memory type, and no bus width, all listed as system shared or system dependent. The NVIDIA part provides a fixed 273.2 GB/s, while AMD bandwidth varies with the host system's memory configuration. In a unified memory architecture, the AMD part's bandwidth is entirely dependent on the platform, whereas the NVIDIA part has a dedicated, consistent memory subsystem.

The database records no wins for either GPU in head-to-head comparisons. With zero wins on each side and no benchmark entries, the quantitative comparison must rely on specification-derived metrics: FP32 throughput, pixel rate, texture rate, memory bandwidth, and shader counts. The data shows NVIDIA leading in raw compute, texture throughput, and memory bandwidth. The data shows AMD leading in pixel fill rate and boost clock.

The Verdict

The benchmark database contains no measured performance results for either the AMD Radeon 8065S or the NVIDIA N1X 40SM. Every benchmark field is empty, both average benchmark scores are zero, and both GPUs share the identical 50th percentile ranking among all GPUs. The nearest rivals arrays are empty, so no relative performance deltas can be calculated. Any selection between these two parts must rely entirely on the specification data, not on observed performance.

The NVIDIA N1X 40SM presents the stronger raw compute profile. Its 24.02 TFLOPS FP32 output exceeds the AMD part's 15.36 TFLOPS by a wide margin. It also has double the shader units, double the texture mapping units, and 160 tensor cores where AMD lists none. The 128 GB LPDDR5X memory with 273.2 GB/s bandwidth is a fixed and substantial resource, while the AMD Radeon 8065S depends entirely on system shared memory with no guaranteed bandwidth figure. For workloads that stress FP32 compute, texture filtering, AI inference, or memory capacity, the recorded specifications favor the NVIDIA part.

The AMD Radeon 8065S offers advantages in other areas. Its 192.0 GPixel/s pixel fill rate is more than double the NVIDIA part's 93.84 GPixel/s, suggesting stronger rasterization throughput for pixel-bound rendering. The AMD boost clock of 3000 MHz is considerably higher than the NVIDIA boost of 2346 MHz, and the AMD base clock of 1295 MHz exceeds the NVIDIA base of 741 MHz. The AMD die is smaller at 308 mm² versus 382 mm² for NVIDIA, and the AMD process node is 4 nm versus 5 nm for NVIDIA. The AMD part also lists a 55 W TDP, while the NVIDIA TDP is unknown in the database.

The AMD Radeon 8065S supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA N1X 40SM lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan. This is a critical distinction: the AMD part has documented graphics API support, while the NVIDIA part has no recorded API compatibility. The display outputs also differ: AMD lists portable device dependent outputs, while NVIDIA lists 1x HDMI.

Given the absence of benchmark data, the verdict is driven by workload type. The NVIDIA N1X 40SM is the specification leader for compute-heavy tasks, AI acceleration, and tasks requiring large dedicated memory. The AMD Radeon 8065S is the specification leader for pixel fill rate, higher clock speeds, documented graphics API support, and lower process node. The AMD part also carries a known 55 W TDP, which allows for power planning, whereas the NVIDIA power draw is unrecorded. No recommendation can be made from measured data because no measured data exists. The database simply records two active IGP products with divergent specifications and no performance evidence.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA N1X 40SM delivers 24.02 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the AMD Radeon 8065S delivers 15.36 TFLOPS. The NVIDIA part provides approximately 56% more FP32 throughput based on the recorded figures.

Q: Do both GPUs have the same number of ray tracing cores?

A: Yes, both the AMD Radeon 8065S and the NVIDIA N1X 40SM are listed with 40 ray tracing cores. However, the NVIDIA part also includes 160 tensor cores, while the AMD part has no tensor core count recorded.

Q: What memory configuration does each GPU use?

A: The AMD Radeon 8065S uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth. The NVIDIA N1X 40SM uses 128 GB of LPDDR5X memory on a 256 bit bus with 273.2 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has the higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Radeon 8065S boosts to 3000 MHz, while the NVIDIA N1X 40SM boosts to 2346 MHz. The AMD part has a 654 MHz higher boost clock.

Q: What graphics APIs does each GPU support?

A: The AMD Radeon 8065S supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA N1X 40SM lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan in the database.

Q: What is the recorded TDP for each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon 8065S has a TDP of 55 W. The NVIDIA N1X 40SM has an unknown TDP, with no power figure recorded in the database.

Q: Which GPU has a faster pixel fill rate?

A: The AMD Radeon 8065S achieves 192.0 GPixel/s, while the NVIDIA N1X 40SM achieves 93.84 GPixel/s. The AMD part is more than twice as fast in pixel throughput.

Specification Differences

The AMD Radeon 8065S uses the Gorgon Halo chip with RDNA 3.5 architecture, built on a 4 nm process at TSMC with a 308 mm² die size. The NVIDIA N1X 40SM uses the GB20B chip with Blackwell 2.0 architecture, built on a 5 nm process at TSMC with a 382 mm² die size. The AMD part belongs to the Navi Mobile (RX 8000M) generation, while the NVIDIA part belongs to the Blackwell IGP (N1x) generation. The AMD predecessor is listed as Polaris Mobile, while the NVIDIA predecessor is not recorded.

Clock speeds differ significantly: AMD base clock is 1295 MHz with a 3000 MHz boost, while NVIDIA base clock is 741 MHz with a 2346 MHz boost. The AMD memory clock is listed as system shared, while the NVIDIA memory clock is 1067 MHz, 8.5 Gbps effective.

Memory specifications diverge entirely. AMD uses system shared memory with system shared type, system shared bus width, and system dependent bandwidth. NVIDIA uses 128 GB of LPDDR5X memory with a 256 bit bus and 273.2 GB/s bandwidth.

Shader configuration differs: AMD has 2560 shading units, 160 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. NVIDIA has 5120 shading units, 320 TMUs, and 40 ROPs. Both have 40 ray tracing cores. AMD has no tensor cores listed, while NVIDIA has 160 tensor cores.

Compute rates differ across the board. AMD pixel rate is 192.0 GPixel/s versus 93.84 GPixel/s for NVIDIA. AMD texture rate is 480.0 GTexel/s versus 750.7 GTexel/s for NVIDIA. AMD FP32 is 15.36 TFLOPS versus 24.02 TFLOPS for NVIDIA. AMD FP16 is 15.36 TFLOPS versus 24.02 TFLOPS for NVIDIA.

Power and physical specifications: AMD has a 55 W TDP with no power connectors and an IGP slot width. NVIDIA has an unknown TDP with no power connectors and an IGP slot width. Both use PCIe 5.0 x16 bus interfaces. AMD display outputs are portable device dependent, while NVIDIA lists 1x HDMI.

API support differs drastically. AMD supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. NVIDIA lists N/A for all three APIs. Release dates also differ: AMD was released on 2025-12-31, while NVIDIA was released on 2026-05-31. Both have active production status.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide starts at the instruction and execution level. The AMD Radeon 8065S uses RDNA 3.5 architecture with 2560 shading units, while the NVIDIA N1X 40SM uses Blackwell 2.0 architecture with 5120 shading units. The NVIDIA part has exactly twice the shader count, which underpins its higher FP32 and FP16 throughput of 24.02 TFLOPS. The AMD part achieves 15.36 TFLOPS with half the shaders but a much higher boost clock of 3000 MHz versus 2346 MHz.

Texture processing favors NVIDIA. The N1X 40SM has 320 texture mapping units producing 750.7 GTexel/s, while the Radeon 8065S has 160 TMUs producing 480.0 GTexel/s. The AMD part compensates with 64 ROPs versus 40 ROPs, yielding 192.0 GPixel/s against 93.84 GPixel/s. The ROP disparity indicates different rasterization pipelines: AMD allocates more hardware to pixel output, while NVIDIA allocates more to texture and compute work.

Ray tracing hardware is nominally equal at 40 cores per GPU, but the surrounding compute resources differ. The NVIDIA part adds 160 tensor cores, which are absent from the AMD specification sheet. Tensor cores accelerate matrix operations for AI workloads, and their presence in the NVIDIA architecture indicates a design priority toward machine learning inference and training. The AMD part has no tensor core count recorded, leaving its AI acceleration capabilities unspecified.

Process technology differs by one node step. AMD uses a 4 nm process at TSMC with a 308 mm² die. NVIDIA uses a 5 nm process at TSMC with a 382 mm² die. The AMD die is 74 mm² smaller despite the finer process node, which suggests different transistor budgets and functional block allocations. The NVIDIA die's larger area accommodates double the shader units, double the TMUs, and 160 tensor cores.

Memory architecture represents the largest structural difference. The AMD Radeon 8065S relies entirely on system shared memory, with bandwidth dependent on the host platform. The NVIDIA N1X 40SM integrates 128 GB of LPDDR5X on a 256 bit bus with a fixed 273.2 GB/s bandwidth. This is a fundamental design divergence: AMD uses a unified memory model where the GPU borrows from system RAM, while NVIDIA dedicates a large, fixed memory pool. The NVIDIA memory clock of 1067 MHz, 8.5 Gbps effective, is a dedicated specification, whereas AMD's memory clock is system shared.

API support reflects the architectural priorities. AMD lists DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, indicating a full graphics API stack. NVIDIA lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan, which means the database records no graphics API compatibility for the N1X 40SM. This could indicate a compute-focused design or a platform that exposes graphics through proprietary interfaces. The AMD part's documented API support aligns with its higher pixel fill rate and ROP count, suggesting a rasterization-oriented architecture.

The NVIDIA part's release date of 2026-05-31 comes after the AMD release date of 2025-12-31. Both are active products. The AMD predecessor is Polaris Mobile, while the NVIDIA predecessor is not recorded. The AMD TDP is known at 55 W, while the NVIDIA TDP is unknown. Both use PCIe 5.0 x16 and occupy an IGP slot width with no power connectors. The NVIDIA display output is 1x HDMI, while AMD outputs are portable device dependent.

The architectural comparison shows two different design philosophies. AMD concentrates on high clock speeds, high pixel throughput, documented graphics APIs, and a smaller, finer process node. NVIDIA concentrates on raw shader count, tensor core acceleration, large dedicated memory, and higher texture and compute throughput. The data records no benchmark results to determine which philosophy translates into better real-world performance.