AMD Radeon 820M vs AMD Radeon RX 6450M Comparison

The Verdict

The recorded data presents a clear separation between these two AMD mobile graphics solutions. The AMD Radeon RX 6450M, built on the RDNA 2.0 architecture, delivers substantially higher raw compute throughput, with an FP32 rating of 3.779 TFLOPS versus the AMD Radeon 820M's 716.8 GFLOPS. This represents more than a fivefold difference in raw shader output. The RX 6450M also carries 4 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, whereas the 820M relies entirely on system memory shared with the CPU, making its bandwidth dependent on the host system's configuration.

The intended use cases diverge sharply. The AMD Radeon 820M, with a 15 W power envelope and an integrated design (IGP), suits thin-and-light portable devices where power efficiency and space are prioritized over absolute performance. Its RDNA 3.5 architecture and 4 nm process node indicate a modern, power-lean design. The AMD Radeon RX 6450M, at 50 W, targets more demanding mobile workloads, including 1080p gaming and content creation, where its dedicated memory and higher texture and pixel rates matter. The data indicates the RX 6450M is the choice for users who need sustained graphical performance, while the 820M serves users who prioritize portability and battery life.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Radeon 820M has a higher boost clock at 2800 MHz, compared to the AMD Radeon RX 6450M's boost of 2460 MHz. However, the RX 6450M compensates with a much larger shader count.

Q: How does the memory configuration differ?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6450M uses 4 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory with a 64-bit bus and 128.0 GB/s bandwidth. The AMD Radeon 820M uses system-shared memory, with both size and bus width listed as "System Shared" and bandwidth described as "System Dependent."

Q: What are the architecture versions of these two GPUs?

A: The AMD Radeon 820M uses RDNA 3.5, while the AMD Radeon RX 6450M uses RDNA 2.0. The 820M is part of the Navi III IGP generation, and the RX 6450M belongs to the Navi Mobile (RX 6000M) generation.

Q: Which GPU has more ray tracing cores?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6450M has 12 ray tracing cores, while the AMD Radeon 820M has 2. This indicates a large disparity in ray-traced workload capability.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The AMD Radeon 820M is rated at 15 W, making it a low-power integrated solution. The AMD Radeon RX 6450M is rated at 50 W, which reflects its higher performance envelope for discrete-class mobile graphics.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same DirectX version?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). They also both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon 820M and AMD Radeon RX 6450M represent different architectural generations and design philosophies. The 820M uses the RDNA 3.5 architecture, fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC. It is part of the Navi III IGP generation, specifically tied to the "Krackan Point 2" chip. This is an integrated graphics processor designed to be embedded alongside a CPU in a mobile package. The architecture emphasizes efficiency and modern feature support within a constrained power budget.

In contrast, the AMD Radeon RX 6450M uses the older RDNA 2.0 architecture, built on a 6 nm process at TSMC. It is based on the Navi 24 chip and belongs to the Navi Mobile (RX 6000M) generation. This chip is larger, with a die size of 107 mm² and 5,400 million transistors, reflecting a more complex design aimed at discrete-level performance. The transistor density is 50.5M per mm².

The core configuration differs drastically. The RX 6450M packs 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, 32 render output units, and 12 ray tracing cores. The 820M has 128 shading units, 8 TMUs, 4 ROPs, and 2 ray tracing cores. This sixfold difference in shading units and eightfold difference in ROPs directly explains the performance gap. The RX 6450M also supports FP16 at a 2:1 ratio, achieving 7.557 TFLOPS, whereas the 820M operates at a 1:1 ratio, giving 716.8 GFLOPS for both FP32 and FP16.

The memory subsystems are fundamentally different. The 820M uses system-shared memory, meaning its bandwidth and capacity depend on the host laptop's RAM configuration. The RX 6450M has its own 4 GB GDDR6 memory with a 64-bit bus and a fixed 128.0 GB/s bandwidth. This dedicated memory avoids contention with the CPU and provides predictable performance.

Specification Differences

The following specifications differ between the two GPUs, based on the recorded data:

• Chip: The 820M uses "Krackan Point 2," while the RX 6450M uses "Navi 24."
• Architecture: RDNA 3.5 for the 820M, RDNA 2.0 for the RX 6450M.
• Process Node: 4 nm for the 820M, 6 nm for the RX 6450M.
• Transistors: Unknown for the 820M, 5,400 million for the RX 6450M.
• Die Size: Unknown for the 820M, 107 mm² for the RX 6450M.
• Transistor Density: Not specified for the 820M, 50.5M / mm² for the RX 6450M.
• Base Clock: 400 MHz for the 820M, 2000 MHz for the RX 6450M.
• Boost Clock: 2800 MHz for the 820M, 2460 MHz for the RX 6450M.
• Game Clock: Not applicable for the 820M, 2220 MHz for the RX 6450M.
• Memory Size: System Shared for the 820M, 4 GB for the RX 6450M.
• Memory Type: System Shared for the 820M, GDDR6 for the RX 6450M.
• Memory Bus Width: System Shared for the 820M, 64 bit for the RX 6450M.
• Memory Bandwidth: System Dependent for the 820M, 128.0 GB/s for the RX 6450M.
• Shading Units: 128 for the 820M, 768 for the RX 6450M.
• TMUs: 8 for the 820M, 48 for the RX 6450M.
• ROPs: 4 for the 820M, 32 for the RX 6450M.
• RT Cores: 2 for the 820M, 12 for the RX 6450M.
• Pixel Rate: 11.20 GPixel/s for the 820M, 78.72 GPixel/s for the RX 6450M.
• Texture Rate: 22.40 GTexel/s for the 820M, 118.1 GTexel/s for the RX 6450M.
• FP32 Performance: 716.8 GFLOPS for the 820M, 3.779 TFLOPS for the RX 6450M.
• FP16 Performance: 716.8 GFLOPS (1:1) for the 820M, 7.557 TFLOPS (2:1) for the RX 6450M.
• TDP: 15 W for the 820M, 50 W for the RX 6450M.
• Bus Interface: PCIe 4.0 x8 for the 820M, PCIe 4.0 x4 for the RX 6450M.
• Release Date: 2025-02-28 for the 820M, 2023-01-03 for the RX 6450M.
• Predecessor: Navi II IGP for the 820M, Polaris Mobile for the RX 6450M.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database does not contain direct head-to-head benchmark scores, but the recorded specification data allows for a clear quantitative comparison. The AMD Radeon RX 6450M leads in every raw performance metric. Its FP32 throughput of 3.779 TFLOPS is approximately 5.3 times higher than the 820M's 716.8 GFLOPS. In FP16 workloads, the RX 6450M's 7.557 TFLOPS is more than 10 times the 820M's 716.8 GFLOPS, thanks to its 2:1 ratio support.

The pixel rate tells a similar story. The RX 6450M achieves 78.72 GPixel/s, while the 820M manages only 11.20 GPixel/s. This translates to a roughly 7x advantage in fill-rate-bound scenarios, such as high-resolution rendering with heavy overdraw. The texture rate gap is also large: 118.1 GTexel/s for the RX 6450M versus 22.40 GTexel/s for the 820M, a 5.3x difference.

Memory bandwidth is where the RX 6450M's dedicated design shines. Its 128.0 GB/s is fixed and independent of the CPU's memory configuration. The 820M's bandwidth is "System Dependent," meaning its effective throughput could vary widely based on the laptop's RAM speed and channel configuration. In dual-channel setups, the 820M might achieve competitive bandwidth, but it would still face latency penalties and contention with CPU workloads.

The 820M does hold one notable specification advantage: its boost clock of 2800 MHz surpasses the RX 6450M's 2460 MHz. This higher clock speed helps the 820M partially offset its smaller core count, but the arithmetic is clear. Even with a 14% higher boost clock, the 820M's 128 shading units cannot match the RX 6450M's 768 shading units in sustained compute tasks.

Where Each One Wins

AMD Radeon RX 6450M wins in:

• Raw compute performance: Its FP32 and FP16 throughput are, respectively, 5.3x and 10.5x higher than the 820M. Applications that rely on shader math, such as 3D rendering, video encoding, and complex game physics, will heavily favor the RX 6450M.
• Memory bandwidth: The dedicated 128.0 GB/s GDDR6 connection ensures consistent performance. The 820M's system-shared memory is a variable that depends on the host laptop's RAM, which can be a bottleneck.
• Pixel and texture throughput: With 32 ROPs versus 4, and 48 TMUs versus 8, the RX 6450M excels in high-resolution gaming and texture-heavy workloads. The 7x pixel rate advantage is critical for maintaining frame rates at 1440p or higher.
• Ray tracing: The 12 RT cores are a substantial asset for modern games that use ray-traced effects. The 820M's 2 RT cores offer basic capability but will struggle with demanding RT workloads.
• Predictability: The RX 6450M's fixed specifications (4 GB, 64-bit bus, 128.0 GB/s) provide a stable performance profile. The 820M's performance is "System Dependent," making it harder to guarantee results across different laptops.

AMD Radeon 820M wins in:

• Power efficiency: A 15 W TDP versus 50 W means the 820M draws one-third the power. This directly translates to longer battery life and thinner chassis designs in portable devices.
• Clock speed: The 2800 MHz boost clock is higher than the RX 6450M's 2460 MHz. In lightly threaded or clock-sensitive workloads, the 820M may show responsiveness advantages, though its core count limits sustained output.
• Modern architecture: RDNA 3.5 is a newer generation than RDNA 2.0. The 820M may include newer instruction sets or power management features, though the database does not specify these details.
• Bus interface: The 820M uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the RX 6450M uses PCIe 4.0 x4. This gives the 820M twice the PCIe lanes for potential CPU communication, which could benefit certain data-transfer-heavy tasks, despite its lower compute capability.
• Integration: As an IGP, the 820M requires no separate power connectors and fits into ultraportable designs. The RX 6450M, while also listed as IGP with no power connectors, has a much higher power draw that requires more substantial cooling.

The data indicates the RX 6450M is the definitive choice for demanding graphical applications. The 820M is the appropriate selection for systems where power consumption and physical size are the primary constraints, accepting a significant performance trade-off.