AMD Radeon 820M vs AMD Radeon PRO W7900 Comparison

FAQ

Q: What is the difference in process node between the AMD Radeon 820M and the AMD Radeon PRO W7900?

A: The Radeon 820M uses TSMC's 4 nm process, while the Radeon PRO W7900 uses TSMC's 5 nm process. The 820M is built on the newer, denser node.

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in terms of memory capacity and bandwidth?

A: The Radeon 820M uses System Shared memory with bandwidth described as System Dependent. The Radeon PRO W7900 has 48 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 384-bit bus, delivering 864.0 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: What are the DirectX and Vulkan support levels for both cards?

A: Both the Radeon 820M and the Radeon PRO W7900 support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. API feature sets are identical.

Q: What is the thermal design power (TDP) for each GPU?

A: The Radeon 820M has a TDP of 15 W, while the Radeon PRO W7900 has a TDP of 295 W. The difference reflects their respective roles as an integrated processor graphics solution versus a dedicated workstation card.

Q: Which GPU has a higher boost clock speed?

A: The Radeon 820M boosts to 2800 MHz, which is higher than the Radeon PRO W7900's boost clock of 2495 MHz. However, the W7900 has a substantially higher base clock at 1760 MHz versus 400 MHz for the 820M.

Q: What is the recorded average benchmark score for the Radeon PRO W7900, and how does it rank?

A: The Radeon PRO W7900 has an average benchmark score of 110725 and sits in the 94th percentile among all GPUs. No benchmark scores are recorded for the Radeon 820M, whose percentile is 50.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs represent opposite ends of AMD's RDNA family. The Radeon 820M uses RDNA 3.5 architecture on the Krackan Point 2 chip, part of the Navi III IGP generation for Strix Point Mobile. The Radeon PRO W7900 uses RDNA 3.0 architecture on the Navi 31 chip, codenamed Plum Bonito, within the Radeon Pro Navi generation.

The transistor counts and die sizes differ dramatically. The Radeon PRO W7900 integrates 57,700 million transistors on a 529 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 109.1M per mm². The Radeon 820M's transistor count and die size are listed as unknown in the database, though its 4 nm process node is one step ahead of the W7900's 5 nm node.

Compute resources scale accordingly. The 820M has 128 shading units, 8 texture mapping units, 4 render output units, and 2 ray tracing cores. The W7900 has 6144 shading units, 384 TMUs, 192 ROPs, and 96 ray tracing cores. That represents 48 times more shading units, 48 times more TMUs, 48 times more ROPs, and 48 times more ray tracing cores. Neither card uses tensor cores.

Clock behavior differs meaningfully. The 820M has a 400 MHz base and 2800 MHz boost, while the W7900 has a 1760 MHz base and 2495 MHz boost. The 820M's high boost on a 15 W envelope indicates a burst-oriented design, whereas the W7900 sustains a much higher floor across its 295 W profile.

Memory architecture is fundamentally different. The 820M shares system memory with the host CPU, with bus width and type both listed as System Shared. The W7900 uses dedicated 48 GB GDDR6 memory on a 384-bit bus, achieving 864.0 GB/s. Memory clock for the W7900 is 2250 MHz, 18 Gbps effective.

Physical form factors diverge completely. The 820M is an integrated graphics processor with no slot width, no power connectors, and no dimensions recorded. The W7900 is a triple-slot card measuring 280 mm by 110 mm by 51 mm, requiring two 8-pin power connectors and a 600 W suggested power supply. The 820M connects via PCIe 4.0 x8, while the W7900 uses PCIe 4.0 x16. Display outputs for the 820M are portable device dependent; the W7900 offers 3x DisplayPort 2.1 and 1x mini-DisplayPort 2.1.

The Verdict

The database shows two products with no overlap in intended deployment. The Radeon 820M is an integrated graphics solution for mobile platforms, evidenced by its System Shared memory, 15 W TDP, IGP slot designation, and lack of discrete power connectors. The Radeon PRO W7900 is a dedicated workstation accelerator, indicated by its 48 GB dedicated GDDR6 frame buffer, triple-slot cooler, dual 8-pin power inputs, and 295 W TDP.

Performance data confirms the separation. The W7900 holds a 94th percentile rank among all GPUs with an average benchmark score of 110725 across Geekbench OpenCL (84379) and Vulkan (137070) tests. The 820M has no recorded benchmark scores and sits at the 50th percentile, a neutral placement in the absence of measurements.

The W7900's nearest rivals in the database are the AMD Radeon Pro Vega II at 109617 points (1% behind), the NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile at 113944 points (2.8% ahead), the AMD Radeon Pro W6600X at 107342 points (3.2% behind), and the NVIDIA Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB at 114395 points (3.2% ahead). These small deltas place the W7900 in a tightly contested professional segment.

For the 820M, no rival comparisons exist in the database. Its role is defined by integration, not isolated compute capability. Users requiring a dedicated workstation GPU with large memory capacity and high throughput should select the W7900. Users seeking an integrated solution for portable devices should consider the 820M, subject to system-level memory performance.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon 820M | AMD Radeon PRO W7900 |

|----------------|-----------------|----------------------|

| Architecture | RDNA 3.5 | RDNA 3.0 |

| Chip | Krackan Point 2 | Navi 31 |

| Codename | None recorded | Plum Bonito |

| Generation | Navi III IGP (Strix Point Mobile) | Radeon Pro Navi (Navi III Series) |

| Process node | 4 nm | 5 nm |

| Transistors | Unknown | 57,700 million |

| Die size | Unknown | 529 mm² |

| Transistor density | None recorded | 109.1M / mm² |

| Base clock | 400 MHz | 1760 MHz |

| Boost clock | 2800 MHz | 2495 MHz |

| Memory clock | System Shared | 2250 MHz, 18 Gbps effective |

| Memory size | System Shared | 48 GB |

| Memory type | System Shared | GDDR6 |

| Memory bus width | System Shared | 384 bit |

| Memory bandwidth | System Dependent | 864.0 GB/s |

| Shading units | 128 | 6144 |

| TMUs | 8 | 384 |

| ROPs | 4 | 192 |

| Ray tracing cores | 2 | 96 |

| Pixel rate | 11.20 GPixel/s | 479.0 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 22.40 GTexel/s | 958.1 GTexel/s |

| FP32 performance | 716.8 GFLOPS | 61.32 TFLOPS |

| FP16 performance | 716.8 GFLOPS (1:1) | 61.32 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 15 W | 295 W |

| Slot width | IGP | Triple-slot |

| Power connectors | None | 2x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | None recorded | 600 W |

| Bus interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |

| Display outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 3x DisplayPort 2.1, 1x mini-DisplayPort 2.1 |

| Dimensions | None recorded | 280 mm x 110 mm x 51 mm |

| Predecessor | Navi II IGP | Radeon Pro Vega |

| Release date | 2025-02-28 | 2023-05-25 |

| Launch MSRP | None recorded | 3,999 USD |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

No direct head-to-head benchmark results exist in the database for these two GPUs. The Radeon 820M has no recorded test scores, while the Radeon PRO W7900 has two Geekbench results. The W7900 scores 84379 in OpenCL and 137070 in Vulkan.

The compute throughput difference is the clearest quantitative separator. The W7900 delivers 61.32 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, which is 85.5 times higher than the 820M's 716.8 GFLOPS. Texture rate follows the same pattern: the W7900 reaches 958.1 GTexel/s versus 22.40 GTexel/s for the 820M, a ratio of roughly 42.8 to 1. Pixel rate shows a 479.0 GPixel/s versus 11.20 GPixel/s gap, approximately 42.8 times in favor of the W7900.

Memory bandwidth is the most extreme differential. The W7900's 864.0 GB/s dedicated bandwidth has no comparable figure on the 820M, whose bandwidth is System Dependent. In a shared-memory configuration, the 820M's bandwidth is constrained by the host platform's memory subsystem, which the database does not quantify.

The W7900's benchmark percentile of 94 places it among the upper tier of all GPUs, with an average score of 110725. Its nearest rivals are all within a 3.2% band, indicating competitive parity in workstation workloads. The 820M's 50th percentile reflects the absence of data rather than measured performance.

Where Each One Wins

The Radeon PRO W7900 wins in every measured category where data exists. Its 48 GB GDDR6 memory with 864.0 GB/s bandwidth supports large datasets and high-resolution textures. The 6144 shading units and 96 ray tracing cores provide the computational foundation for demanding professional workloads. Its 61.32 TFLOPS FP32 throughput is a workstation-class figure, and its 479.0 GPixel/s pixel rate supports high-resolution rendering pipelines. The W7900's triple-slot cooler and 295 W TDP indicate sustained operation under heavy load, and its 600 W suggested PSU requirement reflects its power appetite.

The Radeon 820M wins in power efficiency and integration. Its 15 W TDP is 20 times lower than the W7900's 295 W. The 820M requires no power connectors and occupies no expansion slot, functioning entirely within a portable device's motherboard. Its 2800 MHz boost clock is higher than the W7900's 2495 MHz, which may benefit short-duration, latency-sensitive tasks within the limits of its 128 shading units. The 4 nm process node gives it a density advantage over the W7900's 5 nm node, though the database records no transistor count to quantify this.

The 820M's System Shared memory eliminates the need for dedicated VRAM allocation, simplifying system design for thin-and-light devices. However, this also means its performance scales with the host's memory configuration, a variable the database does not control. The 820M's release date of 2025-02-28 makes it a newer product than the W7900's 2023-05-25 launch.

Use-case separation is clear. The W7900 targets professional workstations requiring large memory capacity, high compute throughput, and multi-display output with 3x DisplayPort 2.1 and 1x mini-DisplayPort 2.1. The 820M targets mobile platforms where power draw, physical footprint, and system-level integration take priority over raw compute. The W7900's nearest rival scores cluster within 109617 to 114395 points, confirming its position in a competitive field; the 820M has no recorded rivals, reflecting its unique integrated status.