AMD Radeon 820M vs AMD Radeon RX 7900 GRE Comparison

The Verdict

The AMD Radeon 820M and the AMD Radeon RX 7900 GRE occupy entirely different positions in the database. The 820M is an integrated processor graphics unit (IGP) built for portability, while the RX 7900 GRE is a dual-slot, discrete add-in board designed for high-end desktop performance. There is no overlap in their intended use cases, and the benchmark data reflects that separation.

The RX 7900 GRE is the clear choice for anyone building a desktop PC with demanding gaming or compute workloads in mind. Its benchmark scores are massive: it records an average benchmark score of 32456, placing it in the 77th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals in the database include the AMD FirePro S10000 (avg score 32388, delta 0.2%), the AMD FirePro S9300 X2 (avg score 32540, delta -0.3%), and the AMD Radeon RX 590 GME (avg score 32601, delta -0.4%). These scores show the RX 7900 GRE sits in a tightly contested performance band, trading fractions of a percent with those cards.

The 820M, by contrast, has no benchmark scores recorded and an average benchmark score of 0, with a 50th percentile ranking. It is best suited for thin-and-light laptops where the CPU's integrated graphics must handle basic display output and light 2D workloads. The data does not support any claim that the 820M can compete with the RX 7900 GRE in raw performance; it simply has no recorded measurements to compare.

For a system builder, the choice is straightforward: if the platform is a desktop with a dedicated power supply and space for a 276 mm card, the RX 7900 GRE delivers the recorded performance. If the platform is a mobile device with no expansion slots, the 820M is the only option of the two that fits.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 7900 GRE wins every measurable category in the database. Its texture rate of 718.4 GTexel/s dwarfs the 820M's 22.40 GTexel/s. Its pixel rate of 359.2 GPixel/s compares to 11.20 GPixel/s for the 820M. Floating-point throughput shows a similar gap: the RX 7900 GRE delivers 45.98 TFLOPS of FP32 compute versus 716.8 GFLOPS for the 820M.

The 820M's only advantage is in power consumption and physical integration. It carries a 15 W TDP and uses no power connectors, while the RX 7900 GRE has a 260 W TDP and requires two 8-pin connectors plus a 600 W suggested power supply. The 820M is an IGP with a slot width of "IGP" and no dimensions recorded, while the RX 7900 GRE is a dual-slot card measuring 276 mm in length, 110 mm in height, and 51 mm in width.

Memory access differs fundamentally. The 820M uses system shared memory with bandwidth described as "System Dependent", while the RX 7900 GRE has 16 GB of dedicated GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 576.0 GB/s of bandwidth. For any workload that relies on memory throughput, the RX 7900 GRE is the only viable choice.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different generations of AMD's RDNA architecture. The 820M uses RDNA 3.5 and is built on a 4 nm process at TSMC, with the chip identified as Krackan Point 2. It belongs to the Navi III IGP (Strix Point Mobile) generation and its predecessor is the Navi II IGP. The RX 7900 GRE uses RDNA 3.0, built on a 5 nm process at TSMC, with the Navi 31 chip and the codename Plum Bonito. It belongs to the Navi III (RX 7000) generation, with a predecessor of Navi II and a successor of Navi IV.

The RX 7900 GRE is a large chip: 57,700 million transistors on a 529 mm² die, with a transistor density of 109.1M per mm². The 820M's transistor count and die size are unknown in the database, so no comparison can be made there.

Execution resources differ by an order of magnitude. The 820M has 128 shading units, 8 texture mapping units, 4 render output units, and 2 ray tracing cores. The RX 7900 GRE has 5120 shading units, 320 texture mapping units, 160 render output units, and 80 ray tracing cores.

Clock behavior also differs. The 820M has a base clock of 400 MHz and a boost clock of 2800 MHz. The RX 7900 GRE runs a base clock of 1287 MHz, a game clock of 1880 MHz, and a boost clock of 2245 MHz. The 820M's higher boost clock is irrelevant given its vastly smaller execution resource pool.

Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The RX 7900 GRE's FP16 throughput is 91.96 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, while the 820M's FP16 is 716.8 GFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has more ray tracing cores?

A: The RX 7900 GRE has 80 ray tracing cores. The 820M has only 2 ray tracing cores.

Q: What memory configuration does each card use?

A: The 820M uses system shared memory with a bus width of "System Shared" and bandwidth described as "System Dependent". The RX 7900 GRE has 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus with 576.0 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: What is the power requirement difference?

A: The 820M has a 15 W TDP and no power connectors. The RX 7900 GRE has a 260 W TDP, requires two 8-pin power connectors, and the database lists a 600 W suggested power supply.

Q: Are there any benchmark scores recorded for the 820M?

A: No, the database has no benchmark entries for the 820M. Its average benchmark score is 0, and it has no nearest rivals listed. The RX 7900 GRE has ten recorded benchmarks across multiple test suites.

Q: What is the physical size difference?

A: The 820M is an IGP with no recorded dimensions and a slot width of "IGP". The RX 7900 GRE is a dual-slot card that is 276 mm long, 110 mm tall, and 51 mm wide.

Q: When was each product released?

A: The 820M has a release date of 2025-02-28. The RX 7900 GRE has a release date of 2023-07-26.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database does not contain any direct head-to-head benchmark entries pairing the 820M against the RX 7900 GRE. The wins count stands at 0 for the 820M and 0 for the RX 7900 GRE in that specific category. However, the RX 7900 GRE has a full set of individual benchmark scores that demonstrate its performance level.

In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, the RX 7900 GRE scores 4814. In Geekbench OpenCL, it scores 175758. In Geekbench Vulkan, it scores 99850.

Passmark results for the RX 7900 GRE cover multiple DirectX versions. DirectX 9 yields a score of 310, DirectX 10 yields 139, DirectX 11 yields 300, and DirectX 12 yields 107. The G2D score is 1180, the G3D score is 27089, and the GPU compute score is 15016.

The RX 7900 GRE's average benchmark score of 32456 places it at the 77th percentile of all GPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals all sit within a narrow band: the AMD FirePro S10000 at 32388 (0.2% above), the AMD FirePro S9300 X2 at 32540 (0.3% below), the AMD Radeon RX 590 GME at 32601 (0.4% below), and the AMD Radeon Pro 570X at 32176 (0.9% above). This indicates the RX 7900 GRE performs essentially at parity with those four cards in aggregate scoring.

With no recorded benchmarks for the 820M, the largest measurable win in either direction cannot be computed from head-to-head data. The only quantifiable comparison comes from specification-derived rates: the RX 7900 GRE's pixel rate is approximately 32 times that of the 820M (359.2 GPixel/s versus 11.20 GPixel/s), and its texture rate is approximately 32 times higher as well (718.4 GTexel/s versus 22.40 GTexel/s). FP32 throughput is roughly 64 times higher on the RX 7900 GRE (45.98 TFLOPS versus 716.8 GFLOPS).

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two products in the database:

| Field | AMD Radeon 820M | AMD Radeon RX 7900 GRE |

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

| Series | None listed | Radeon RX 7000 series |

| Chip | Krackan Point 2 | Navi 31 |

| Architecture | RDNA 3.5 | RDNA 3.0 |

| Codename | None listed | Plum Bonito |

| Generation | Navi III IGP (Strix Point Mobile) | Navi III (RX 7000) |

| Process node | 4 nm | 5 nm |

| Transistors | Unknown | 57,700 million |

| Die size | Unknown | 529 mm² |

| Transistor density | Not listed | 109.1M / mm² |

| Base clock | 400 MHz | 1287 MHz |

| Boost clock | 2800 MHz | 2245 MHz |

| Game clock | None listed | 1880 MHz |

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

| Memory size | System Shared | 16 GB |

| Memory type | System Shared | GDDR6 |

| Memory bus width | System Shared | 256 bit |

| Memory bandwidth | System Dependent | 576.0 GB/s |

| Shading units | 128 | 5120 |

| TMUs | 8 | 320 |

| ROPs | 4 | 160 |

| RT cores | 2 | 80 |

| Pixel rate | 11.20 GPixel/s | 359.2 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 22.40 GTexel/s | 718.4 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 716.8 GFLOPS | 45.98 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 716.8 GFLOPS (1:1) | 91.96 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 15 W | 260 W |

| Slot width | IGP | Dual-slot |

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

| Suggested PSU | None listed | 600 W |

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

| Display outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 1x HDMI 2.1a, 2x DisplayPort 2.1, 1x USB Type-C |

| Dimensions | Not listed | 276 mm x 110 mm x 51 mm |

| Release date | 2025-02-28 | 2023-07-26 |

| Predecessor | Navi II IGP | Navi II |

| Successor | None listed | Navi IV |

| Launch MSRP | None listed | 549 USD |

| Percentile vs all GPUs | 50 | 77 |

| Average benchmark score | 0 | 32456 |

| Nearest rivals | None listed | FirePro S10000, FirePro S9300 X2, RX 590 GME, Radeon Pro 570X |

The API support is identical between the two: both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Both are manufactured by TSMC. Both are listed as Active in production status. Neither has tensor cores listed in the database.