AMD Radeon 820M vs AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT Comparison

FAQ

Q: What is the fundamental difference between the AMD Radeon 820M and the AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT?

A: The Radeon 820M is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) built on the Krackan Point 2 chip using RDNA 3.5 architecture, while the RX 7600 XT is a discrete add-in board using the Navi 33 chip with RDNA 3.0 architecture.

Q: How do the memory subsystems compare?

A: The Radeon 820M uses system shared memory with bandwidth described as "System Dependent," while the RX 7600 XT has 16 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus delivering 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU shows a higher average benchmark score?

A: The RX 7600 XT has an average benchmark score of 17083 and sits at the 60th percentile among all GPUs. The Radeon 820M has an average benchmark score of 0 and is at the 50th percentile.

Q: What power connector does each GPU require?

A: The Radeon 820M uses no power connectors and has a 15 W TDP, while the RX 7600 XT uses a single 8-pin connector, has a 190 W TDP, and requires a suggested 450 W power supply.

Q: Are there differences in display output capabilities?

A: The Radeon 820M's display outputs are "Portable Device Dependent," meaning they vary by the laptop or portable device it is installed in. The RX 7600 XT offers 1x HDMI 2.1a and 3x DisplayPort 2.1 outputs.

Q: What is the release timeline for these two GPUs?

A: The RX 7600 XT was released on 2024-01-23, while the Radeon 820M was released later, on 2025-02-28. The RX 7600 XT has a launch MSRP of 329 USD.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different branches of AMD's RDNA family. The Radeon 820M uses RDNA 3.5 architecture on the Krackan Point 2 chip, placing it in the Navi III IGP (Strix Point Mobile) generation. The RX 7600 XT uses RDNA 3.0 architecture on the Navi 33 chip, codenamed "Hotpink Bonefish," and belongs to the Navi III (RX 7000) generation.

Manufacturing processes differ substantially. The Radeon 820M is fabricated on TSMC's 4 nm node, while the RX 7600 XT uses TSMC's 6 nm node. The RX 7600 XT carries 13,300 million transistors on a 204 mm² die, with a transistor density of 65.2M per mm². The Radeon 820M's transistor count and die size are both listed as unknown, though the 4 nm process suggests a denser implementation per area.

Compute resources show a wide gap. The Radeon 820M has 128 shading units, 8 texture mapping units, 4 raster output units, and 2 ray tracing cores. The RX 7600 XT scales this up dramatically with 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 32 ray tracing cores. That is a 16x difference in shading units and TMUs, and a 16x difference in ray tracing cores.

Clock behavior also differs. The Radeon 820M runs at a 400 MHz base clock and boosts to 2800 MHz. The RX 7600 XT has a 1980 MHz base clock, a 2755 MHz boost clock, and a 2470 MHz game clock. The integrated part actually has a slightly higher boost ceiling, but the discrete part starts from a far higher base frequency.

Both GPUs support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Neither has tensor cores listed. The bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x8 for both, which is an interesting commonality given how different the rest of the hardware is.

Where Each One Wins

The Radeon 820M is designed for mobility and integration. Its 15 W TDP, IGP slot width, and lack of power connectors make it suitable for portable devices where space and thermal budgets are tight. The "System Shared" memory and "System Dependent" bandwidth indicate it pulls from the host system's memory pool, which keeps the bill of materials low but limits performance scaling.

The RX 7600 XT wins in every raw performance category. Its 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus provides 288.0 GB/s of dedicated bandwidth, a figure that completely outclasses shared memory approaches. The 2048 shading units and 64 ROPs give it a decisive edge in fill-rate and compute workloads. The 22.57 TFLOPS FP32 throughput versus 716.8 GFLOPS for the 820M is a 31.5x difference.

The RX 7600 XT's 176.3 GPixel/s pixel rate and 352.6 GTexel/s texture rate dwarf the 820M's 11.20 GPixel/s and 22.40 GTexel/s. For any workload that stresses rasterization, texturing, or compute, the discrete card is the clear pick.

The Radeon 820M's advantages are physical and environmental rather than performance-based. It takes up no expansion slot, requires no external power, and its display outputs depend on the host portable device. The RX 7600 XT is a dual-slot card measuring 204 mm in length and 115 mm in height, requiring a 450 W suggested power supply.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon 820M | AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT |

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

| Chip | Krackan Point 2 | Navi 33 |

| Architecture | RDNA 3.5 | RDNA 3.0 |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 6 nm |

| Transistors | unknown | 13,300 million |

| Die Size | unknown | 204 mm² |

| Base Clock | 400 MHz | 1980 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2800 MHz | 2755 MHz |

| Game Clock | none listed | 2470 MHz |

| Memory Size | System Shared | 16 GB |

| Memory Type | System Shared | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus | System Shared | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | System Dependent | 288.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 128 | 2048 |

| TMUs | 8 | 128 |

| ROPs | 4 | 64 |

| RT Cores | 2 | 32 |

| Pixel Rate | 11.20 GPixel/s | 176.3 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 22.40 GTexel/s | 352.6 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 716.8 GFLOPS | 22.57 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 716.8 GFLOPS (1:1) | 22.57 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 15 W | 190 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | 1x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | none listed | 450 W |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 1x HDMI 2.1a, 3x DisplayPort 2.1 |

| Dimensions | none listed | 204 mm length, 115 mm height |

| Release Date | 2025-02-28 | 2024-01-23 |

The release dates place the RX 7600 XT more than a year earlier. The 820M's predecessor is listed as "Navi II IGP," while the RX 7600 XT's predecessor is "Navi II" and its successor is "Navi IV."

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database has no direct head-to-head benchmark entries for these two GPUs, meaning there are no paired test scores where both were run on the same test suite. The RX 7600 XT does have ten recorded benchmark scores, while the Radeon 820M has none in the database.

The RX 7600 XT's recorded tests show a strong compute profile. In Geekbench OpenCL it scored 92426, and in Geekbench Vulkan it scored 48366. Passmark tests show a G3D score of 17132, a GPU compute score of 8987, G2D of 1030, DirectX 9 of 228, DirectX 11 of 167, DirectX 10 of 85, and DirectX 12 of 65. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test produced a score of 2348.

The nearest rivals for the RX 7600 XT put its average score in context. It sits 0.3% above the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 690 (which averages 17037), 0.4% above the AMD Radeon HD 7970M (17019), 0.9% above the NVIDIA Tesla M4 (16932), and 0.7% below the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 (17208). These deltas are all under one percent, indicating the RX 7600 XT lands in a dense cluster of comparable GPUs.

The wins tally shows 0 wins for the 820M and 0 wins for the RX 7600 XT in direct head-to-head benchmarks. The lack of recorded benchmarks for the 820M means no comparative scores exist in the database to quantify the performance gap directly. What the data does show is that the RX 7600 XT has an average benchmark score of 17083 and a 60th percentile standing across all GPUs, while the 820M has an average score of 0 and a 50th percentile standing.

The Verdict

The data describes two GPUs with completely different roles. The AMD Radeon 820M is an integrated processor for portable devices, built on a 4 nm process with 128 shading units, a 15 W TDP, and system shared memory. It has no standalone benchmark scores in the database, which limits quantitative comparison, but its hardware profile places it clearly in the low-power integrated segment.

The AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT is a discrete dual-slot card with 2048 shading units, 16 GB of GDDR6 memory, 288.0 GB/s bandwidth, and 22.57 TFLOPS FP32 throughput. Its average benchmark score of 17083 and 60th percentile ranking across all GPUs put it in a competitive position against the GTX 690, HD 7970M, Tesla M4, and RTX 3070, all within roughly one percent of each other.

The choice between these two is determined by the platform. The 820M belongs in systems where a discrete card cannot fit, where power draw must stay near 15 W, and where memory is shared with the host. The RX 7600 XT requires a PCIe 4.0 x8 slot, a 450 W suggested power supply, a single 8-pin connector, and dual-slot clearance in a chassis. Its 190 W TDP is over 12 times that of the 820M. The RX 7600 XT also carries a launch MSRP of 329 USD, while no launch MSRP is listed for the 820M.

The performance gap is not close. The RX 7600 XT has 16 times the shading units, 16 times the TMUs, 16 times the ROPs, and 16 times the ray tracing cores of the 820M. Its pixel rate is roughly 15.7 times higher, its texture rate roughly 15.7 times higher, and its FP32 throughput roughly 31.5 times higher. Any workload that can use these resources will strongly favor the discrete card.

The 820M's only recorded advantages are architectural: newer RDNA 3.5 design, smaller 4 nm process, a higher boost clock of 2800 MHz versus 2755 MHz, and a vastly lower power envelope. For users constrained to integrated graphics, the 820M represents the modern option in that segment. For users who need actual rendering and compute performance, the RX 7600 XT is the only one of the two with recorded benchmark evidence of capability. The database shows no benchmark scores for the 820M, which means its real-world performance remains unquantified in this record.