AMD Radeon 820M vs AMD Radeon RX 9050 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results for the AMD Radeon 820M and the AMD Radeon RX 9050. Both entries show an empty benchmark array, an average benchmark score of zero, and a percentile rank of 50 against all GPUs. This means the two products cannot be compared through measured performance data at this time.

The absence of scores is notable given the substantial architectural gap between the two. The Radeon 820M is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) built for mobile devices, while the Radeon RX 9050 is a dual-slot discrete graphics card from the Radeon RX 9000 series. Without recorded benchmarks, any performance comparison must rely entirely on the specification differences listed in the database.

The only quantitative performance indicators available are theoretical throughput rates. In FP32 compute, the Radeon RX 9050 delivers 10.65 TFLOPS, whereas the Radeon 820M delivers 716.8 GFLOPS. This places the RX 9050 at approximately 14.85 times the FP32 throughput of the 820M, based on the division of the two recorded figures. The pixel rate follows a similar pattern: the RX 9050 outputs 166.4 GPixel/s, while the 820M outputs 11.20 GPixel/s, a ratio of roughly 14.86. Texture rate shows the RX 9050 at 166.4 GTexel/s against 22.40 GTexel/s for the 820M, a ratio of about 7.43.

These figures are theoretical maxima, not measured benchmark results, and the database does not list any workload-specific scores to confirm real-world scaling. The data indicates the RX 9050 holds a large raw throughput advantage in every rate category, but the lack of benchmark entries means no performance percentage deltas can be cited.

Where Each One Wins

The Radeon 820M is classified as an IGP with a 15 W TDP, a slot width of "IGP", and no power connectors. Its memory is system shared, with bandwidth described as "System Dependent". This product is designed for portable devices, as its display outputs are listed as "Portable Device Dependent". The 820M uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 bus interface. In this context, the 820M wins in power efficiency and integration: it requires no additional power connector, fits into a mobile form factor, and relies on shared system memory rather than dedicated VRAM.

The Radeon RX 9050 is a discrete card with a 92 W TDP, a dual-slot footprint, and a single 8-pin power connector. The database suggests a 250 W power supply for systems using this card. It has 8 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The RX 9050 connects via PCIe 5.0 x16 and offers display outputs of 1x HDMI 2.1b and 2x DisplayPort 2.1a. This product wins in every raw graphics capability category: shading units, texture mapping units, render output units, ray tracing cores, memory bandwidth, and pixel/texture rates.

For use-case analysis, the 820M suits environments where power draw and physical space are constrained, such as thin-and-light laptops. The RX 9050 suits desktop systems requiring high-resolution rendering, ray tracing workloads, or high frame-rate gaming, based on its dedicated memory and much larger compute resources. The data does not include any benchmark wins for either product, so these conclusions stem from specification differences only.

Architecture Differences

The Radeon 820M uses the Krackan Point 2 chip, built on the RDNA 3.5 architecture, and belongs to the Navi III IGP generation for Strix Point Mobile. The Radeon RX 9050 uses the Navi 44 chip, built on the RDNA 4.0 architecture, and belongs to the Navi IV generation within the RX 9000 series. Both are manufactured by AMD on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The 820M has an unknown transistor count and die size, while the RX 9050 lists 29,700 million transistors on a 199 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 149.2M per mm².

The 820M features 128 shading units, 8 texture mapping units, 4 render output units, and 2 ray tracing cores. The RX 9050 features 1024 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, 64 render output units, and 16 ray tracing cores. These are straightforward multiples: the RX 9050 has 8 times the shading units, 8 times the TMUs, 16 times the ROPs, and 8 times the RT cores, all based on the recorded values.

Clock behavior differs significantly. The 820M has a base clock of 400 MHz and a boost clock of 2800 MHz, with no game clock listed. The RX 9050 has a base clock of 1330 MHz, a boost clock of 2600 MHz, and a game clock of 1920 MHz. Memory clocking also differs: the 820M uses system shared memory with no dedicated clock speed, while the RX 9050 uses GDDR6 at 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective data rate.

Both products support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Neither lists tensor cores. The 820M's predecessor is Navi II IGP, while the RX 9050's predecessor is Navi III. The 820M was released on 2025-02-28, and the RX 9050 on 2026-07-27. Both are marked as Active in production status.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 9050 has 1024 shading units, versus 128 for the AMD Radeon 820M.

Q: Do these GPUs support the same DirectX version?

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

Q: What kind of memory does each GPU use?

A: The Radeon 820M uses system shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth. The Radeon RX 9050 uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: How do the power requirements differ?

A: The Radeon 820M has a 15 W TDP and no power connectors. The Radeon RX 9050 has a 92 W TDP and requires one 8-pin power connector, with a suggested 250 W power supply.

Q: Which GPU has a higher boost clock?

A: The Radeon 820M has a boost clock of 2800 MHz, which is higher than the Radeon RX 9050's boost clock of 2600 MHz.

Q: Are there any benchmark scores for either GPU in the database?

A: No, both entries have an empty benchmark array and an average benchmark score of zero.

Specification Differences

| Field | AMD Radeon 820M | AMD Radeon RX 9050 |

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

| Series | null | Radeon RX 9000 series |

| Chip | Krackan Point 2 | Navi 44 |

| Architecture | RDNA 3.5 | RDNA 4.0 |

| Generation | Navi III IGP (Strix Point Mobile) | Navi IV (RX 9000) |

| Transistors | unknown | 29,700 million |

| Die Size | unknown | 199 mm² |

| Transistor Density | null | 149.2M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 400 MHz | 1330 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2800 MHz | 2600 MHz |

| Game Clock | null | 1920 MHz |

| Memory Clock | System Shared | 2250 MHz 18 Gbps effective |

| Memory Size | System Shared | 8 GB |

| Memory Type | System Shared | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus Width | System Shared | 128 bit |

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

| Shading Units | 128 | 1024 |

| TMUs | 8 | 64 |

| ROPs | 4 | 64 |

| RT Cores | 2 | 16 |

| Pixel Rate | 11.20 GPixel/s | 166.4 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 22.40 GTexel/s | 166.4 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 716.8 GFLOPS | 10.65 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 716.8 GFLOPS (1:1) | 10.65 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 15 W | 92 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | Dual-slot |

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

| Suggested PSU | null | 250 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | PCIe 5.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 1x HDMI 2.1b, 2x DisplayPort 2.1a |

| Release Date | 2025-02-28 | 2026-07-27 |

| Predecessor | Navi II IGP | Navi III |

The Verdict

The data presents two products at opposite ends of the GPU spectrum. The Radeon 820M is an integrated solution with minimal power draw, no dedicated memory, and a mobile-oriented feature set. The Radeon RX 9050 is a discrete, dual-slot card with dedicated GDDR6 memory, a 128-bit bus, and roughly 15 times the FP32 throughput of the 820M, based on recorded figures.

Users requiring a GPU for a portable device with constrained power and space should consider the Radeon 820M, given its 15 W TDP, IGP form factor, and reliance on system shared memory. Users requiring high-resolution gaming, ray tracing, or compute-heavy workloads should consider the Radeon RX 9050, given its 8 GB VRAM, 288.0 GB/s bandwidth, 16 RT cores, and 10.65 TFLOPS FP32 performance.

The database contains no benchmark results for either product, so this verdict cannot cite measured performance or rival comparisons. The recommendation follows solely from the recorded specifications, which show a clear divide in capability and intended usage environment. The RX 9050's dual-slot size, 8-pin power requirement, and 250 W power supply suggestion indicate a desktop-oriented installation. The 820M's portable-device-dependent outputs and lack of power connectors indicate a mobile or embedded deployment. The production status for both is Active, meaning both are currently available according to the database records.