AMD Radeon 820M vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Max-Q Comparison

AMD Radeon 820M and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Max-Q occupy opposite ends of the mobile graphics spectrum, and the recorded data confirms that distinction without any ambiguity. The RTX 4060 Max-Q is a discrete-class solution built on a 5 nm process with 18,900 million transistors on a 159 mm² die, while the Radeon 820M is an integrated graphics processor on AMD’s Krackan Point 2 chip, fabricated on a 4 nm node. The database shows no overlapping benchmark scores, and the architectural gap translates directly into performance metrics that are orders of magnitude apart.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark database contains no direct head-to-head results for these two parts, so the comparison relies on the recorded specification-level data and the derived performance rates. The most telling metric is raw shading throughput. The RTX 4060 Max-Q delivers 9.032 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the Radeon 820M manages 716.8 GFLOPS. This places the NVIDIA part at roughly 12.6 times the FP32 throughput of the AMD IGP, a gap that dominates every compute-bound workload.

Pixel throughput follows the same pattern. The RTX 4060 Max-Q achieves 70.56 GPixel/s, compared to 11.20 GPixel/s for the Radeon 820M. That is a 6.3x advantage for NVIDIA in fill-rate-limited scenarios. Texture rate shows an even wider split: 141.1 GTexel/s versus 22.40 GTexel/s, a multiplier of 6.3x as well. These three metrics alone establish that the RTX 4060 Max-Q is not merely faster, it is in a different performance class.

Memory bandwidth reinforces the hierarchy. The RTX 4060 Max-Q uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, yielding 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Radeon 820M relies on system-shared memory with bandwidth described as "System Dependent," meaning its effective throughput is contingent on the host platform’s memory configuration. In any realistic comparison, the dedicated 256.0 GB/s figure for the NVIDIA part is several times higher than what an IGP can achieve through shared system memory.

Clock speeds also diverge significantly. The Radeon 820M has a base clock of 400 MHz and a boost of 2800 MHz. The RTX 4060 Max-Q operates at a base of 1140 MHz and boosts to 1470 MHz. While the AMD part has a higher boost frequency, its much lower shader count (128 versus 3072) means raw frequency advantage cannot compensate for the 24x difference in shading units.

Where Each One Wins

The Radeon 820M wins in scenarios that favor low power consumption and integration. Its 15 W TDP is less than half of the RTX 4060 Max-Q’s 35 W TDP. For thin-and-light portables where thermal headroom is minimal, the AMD IGP offers a path to basic graphics acceleration without requiring a discrete GPU. The 4 nm process node also suggests better power efficiency per transistor, though the database does not provide efficiency ratios beyond the TDP figures.

The RTX 4060 Max-Q wins in every performance-oriented category. Its 3072 shading units, 96 TMUs, and 48 ROPs provide the hardware resources needed for modern gaming and GPU-accelerated productivity. The presence of 24 RT cores and 96 tensor cores gives it dedicated hardware for ray tracing and AI workloads, features that the Radeon 820M lacks entirely, as its tensor core field is null and its RT core count is just 2. The 8 GB GDDR6 frame buffer is another decisive advantage, as the Radeon 820M has no dedicated video memory.

For use-case analysis, the Radeon 820M is suited for office productivity, light media playback, and casual 2D workloads where GPU load is minimal. The RTX 4060 Max-Q targets gaming at 1080p with high settings, ray-traced titles, video editing, and machine learning inference, all of which require the FP32 throughput and memory bandwidth the NVIDIA part provides.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide starts with the process node. AMD uses TSMC’s 4 nm process for Krackan Point 2, while NVIDIA uses TSMC’s 5 nm process for AD107. The 4 nm node is denser, which helps the Radeon 820M integrate graphics into a CPU package, but the RTX 4060 Max-Q compensates with a much larger die and far more transistors: 18,900 million versus an unknown figure for the AMD part.

The Radeon 820M is built on RDNA 3.5, part of the Navi III IGP generation for Strix Point Mobile. It has 128 shading units, 8 TMUs, 4 ROPs, and 2 RT cores. Its predecessor is Navi II IGP, and it was released on 2025-02-28. The RTX 4060 Max-Q uses Ada Lovelace architecture, part of the GeForce 40 Mobile generation, with 3072 shading units, 96 TMUs, 48 ROPs, 24 RT cores, and 96 tensor cores. It succeeded GeForce 30 Mobile and was itself succeeded by GeForce 50 Mobile, with a release date of 2023-01-02.

Memory architecture is a fundamental differentiator. The Radeon 820M uses system-shared memory with no dedicated VRAM, while the RTX 4060 Max-Q has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit interface. The NVIDIA part’s 256.0 GB/s bandwidth is a fixed hardware capability, whereas the AMD IGP’s bandwidth is "System Dependent," varying with the host CPU and memory configuration.

Both parts support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API-level feature parity exists. Both also use PCIe 4.0 x8 and have no power connectors, with display outputs described as portable-device dependent. The RTX 4060 Max-Q also carries 96 tensor cores for AI acceleration, a feature class the Radeon 820M does not implement.

The Verdict

The data indicates that the RTX 4060 Max-Q is the superior GPU for any task that requires substantial graphics compute. Its 9.032 TFLOPS FP32, 256.0 GB/s memory bandwidth, and 24 RT cores place it in a performance tier that the Radeon 820M cannot approach. The AMD part’s 716.8 GFLOPS and 4 ROPs are adequate for basic display output but insufficient for demanding 3D rendering or modern gaming.

The Radeon 820M’s advantage is purely in its integration and power envelope. At 15 W TDP, it fits into processors where a discrete GPU would be impractical. The RTX 4060 Max-Q requires 35 W, which is still modest for a discrete GPU but more than double the AMD IGP’s budget.

The database records no benchmark scores for either part, with avgBenchmarkScore at 0 and percentileVsAllGpus at 50 for both. This means the comparison must rest on the specification-derived rates, which are unambiguous. The RTX 4060 Max-Q is the choice for performance. The Radeon 820M is the choice for minimal power draw and system simplicity. There is no scenario where the data suggests the AMD IGP outperforms the NVIDIA discrete GPU.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the RTX 4060 Max-Q in FP32 compute compared to the Radeon 820M?

A: The RTX 4060 Max-Q delivers 9.032 TFLOPS FP32, while the Radeon 820M delivers 716.8 GFLOPS, making the NVIDIA part approximately 12.6 times faster in raw shading throughput.

Q: Does the Radeon 820M have dedicated VRAM?

A: No. The Radeon 820M uses system-shared memory for both size and type, with bandwidth described as "System Dependent." The RTX 4060 Max-Q has 8 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU supports ray tracing hardware?

A: The RTX 4060 Max-Q has 24 RT cores. The Radeon 820M has only 2 RT cores, so its ray tracing capability is minimal at best.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?

A: The Radeon 820M has a 15 W TDP, while the RTX 4060 Max-Q has a 35 W TDP. The AMD IGP consumes less than half the power of the NVIDIA part.

Q: Are the API feature sets identical?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, and both use PCIe 4.0 x8.

Q: Which one has more shading units?

A: The RTX 4060 Max-Q has 3072 shading units, versus 128 for the Radeon 820M, a 24x difference.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon 820M | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Max-Q |

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

| Architecture | RDNA 3.5 | Ada Lovelace |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 5 nm |

| Transistors | unknown | 18,900 million |

| Die Size | unknown | 159 mm² |

| Base Clock | 400 MHz | 1140 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2800 MHz | 1470 MHz |

| Memory Size | System Shared | 8 GB |

| Memory Type | System Shared | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus Width | System Shared | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | System Dependent | 256.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 128 | 3072 |

| TMUs | 8 | 96 |

| ROPs | 4 | 48 |

| RT Cores | 2 | 24 |

| Tensor Cores | null | 96 |

| Pixel Rate | 11.20 GPixel/s | 70.56 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 22.40 GTexel/s | 141.1 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 716.8 GFLOPS | 9.032 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 716.8 GFLOPS (1:1) | 9.032 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 15 W | 35 W |

| Release Date | 2025-02-28 | 2023-01-02 |

| Predecessor | Navi II IGP | GeForce 30 Mobile |

| Successor | null | GeForce 50 Mobile |