AMD Radeon 820M vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Max-Q Comparison

The AMD Radeon 820M and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Max-Q occupy opposite ends of the mobile graphics spectrum, despite sharing an integrated form factor. The Radeon 820M is a low-power IGP built for everyday computing, while the RTX 4080 Max-Q is a high-performance mobile GPU with dedicated memory and a much larger execution engine. The database records no head-to-head benchmark results for this pairing, so the analysis below relies entirely on the recorded specification fields and architectural data to establish where each part operates and how they differ.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon 820M wins in scenarios where power consumption is the primary constraint. Its thermal design power is recorded at 15 W, which is a quarter of the 60 W figure listed for the RTX 4080 Max-Q. For portable devices that rely on shared system memory and modest cooling, the 820M uses the system's main memory rather than a dedicated pool, which keeps the overall platform simpler and lowers the electrical load. Its base clock of 400 MHz and boost clock of 2800 MHz indicate a design tuned for light, bursty workloads rather than sustained heavy rendering.

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Max-Q wins in raw compute and rendering throughput. It delivers 20.04 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the Radeon 820M delivers 716.8 GFLOPS. That is a massive gap in raw arithmetic throughput, and it extends to pixel and texture processing. The RTX 4080 Max-Q records a pixel rate of 108.0 GPixel/s versus 11.20 GPixel/s for the AMD part, and a texture rate of 313.2 GTexel/s versus 22.40 GTexel/s. Every measured throughput field favors the NVIDIA part by a wide margin.

The RTX 4080 Max-Q also wins in memory bandwidth. It has 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, delivering 432.0 GB/s. The Radeon 820M has no dedicated memory; its bandwidth is listed as system dependent, meaning it uses whatever the host system provides. For workloads that repeatedly access large datasets, the NVIDIA part has a clear structural advantage.

The Radeon 820M wins on integration simplicity. It uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface, while the RTX 4080 Max-Q uses PCIe 4.0 x16. For a thin-and-light laptop with no discrete GPU slot, the 820M fits directly into the processor package. The RTX 4080 Max-Q, despite being labeled IGP in the slot width field, is a discrete-class chip with its own memory subsystem and a much larger die, so it requires more board space and more robust cooling.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher FP32 compute throughput?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Max-Q records 20.04 TFLOPS of FP32 performance. The AMD Radeon 820M records 716.8 GFLOPS, which is roughly 28 times lower.

Q: How much memory does each GPU use?

A: The RTX 4080 Max-Q has 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus. The Radeon 820M uses system shared memory, with its bandwidth listed as system dependent.

Q: What is the difference in thermal design power?

A: The Radeon 820M is rated at 15 W, while the RTX 4080 Max-Q is rated at 60 W. That makes the NVIDIA part four times more power-hungry on paper.

Q: Which GPU has a higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Radeon 820M has a boost clock of 2800 MHz, which is higher than the RTX 4080 Max-Q boost clock of 1350 MHz. However, the NVIDIA part achieves far higher throughput due to its much larger shader count and dedicated memory.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same graphics APIs?

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

Q: What is the transistor count of each chip?

A: The RTX 4080 Max-Q uses the AD104 chip with 35,800 million transistors on a 294 mm² die. The Radeon 820M transistor count is listed as unknown.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no recorded head-to-head benchmark entries for the AMD Radeon 820M and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Max-Q. The wins counters are both zero, and the head-to-head array is empty. This means there is no empirical benchmark data to walk through in this pairing. What the database does provide is a complete specification sheet for each part, and those fields allow for a direct comparison of theoretical throughput limits.

The largest gap appears in FP32 floating-point performance. The RTX 4080 Max-Q records 20.04 TFLOPS, while the Radeon 820M records 716.8 GFLOPS. In percentage terms, the NVIDIA part is about 27.96 times higher, or roughly 2,796 percent higher. That is the single biggest numeric difference in the recorded data.

The shading unit count explains this gap. The RTX 4080 Max-Q has 7424 shading units, while the Radeon 820M has 128. The texture mapping units follow the same pattern: 232 versus 8. The render output units are 80 versus 4. These fields directly drive the pixel rate and texture rate differences. The NVIDIA part's pixel rate of 108.0 GPixel/s is about 9.64 times higher than the 11.20 GPixel/s of the AMD part. The texture rate of 313.2 GTexel/s is about 13.98 times higher than 22.40 GTexel/s.

The RTX 4080 Max-Q also has dedicated ray tracing and tensor hardware. It records 58 RT cores and 232 tensor cores. The Radeon 820M records 2 RT cores and no tensor cores, listed as null. This means the NVIDIA part is structurally designed for ray-traced workloads and AI-accelerated tasks, while the AMD part has only minimal ray tracing support and no tensor equivalent.

Memory bandwidth is another major differentiator. The RTX 4080 Max-Q has 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth from its GDDR6 memory, while the Radeon 820M has no dedicated memory and a system dependent bandwidth figure. For any workload that streams large textures or geometry, the NVIDIA part has a decisive advantage.

Clock speeds do not favor the NVIDIA part. The Radeon 820M boost clock is 2800 MHz, more than double the 1350 MHz boost of the RTX 4080 Max-Q. The base clocks are 400 MHz and 795 MHz respectively. The AMD part compensates for its low shader count with a high boost clock, but the sheer difference in execution resources makes the clock advantage irrelevant for heavy workloads.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every major specification field. The Radeon 820M uses the Krackan Point 2 chip with RDNA 3.5 architecture, while the RTX 4080 Max-Q uses the AD104 chip with Ada Lovelace architecture. The process nodes differ: 4 nm for AMD, 5 nm for NVIDIA. The transistor count is unknown for the AMD chip but recorded as 35,800 million for the NVIDIA chip, with a die size of 294 mm² and a transistor density of 121.8M per mm².

The memory subsystems are entirely different. The AMD part has system shared memory with no dedicated size, type, bus width, or bandwidth figure. The NVIDIA part has 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus with 432.0 GB/s bandwidth. The memory clock is recorded as 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective for the NVIDIA part, while the AMD part simply states system shared.

The execution resources differ by orders of magnitude. The Radeon 820M has 128 shading units, 8 TMUs, and 4 ROPs. The RTX 4080 Max-Q has 7424 shading units, 232 TMUs, and 80 ROPs. Ray tracing cores are 2 versus 58, and tensor cores are null versus 232. The pixel rate is 11.20 GPixel/s versus 108.0 GPixel/s, and the texture rate is 22.40 GTexel/s versus 313.2 GTexel/s.

The power and interface fields also differ. The AMD part is rated at 15 W with a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface. The NVIDIA part is rated at 60 W with a PCIe 4.0 x16 interface. Both are listed as IGP for slot width, and both have no power connectors and portable device dependent display outputs. The release dates differ: the Radeon 820M launched on 2025-02-28, while the RTX 4080 Max-Q launched on 2023-01-02. The NVIDIA part lists a predecessor of GeForce 30 Mobile and a successor of GeForce 50 Mobile, while the AMD part lists a predecessor of Navi II IGP.

Architecture Differences

The architectural split is clear from the recorded fields. The Radeon 820M uses RDNA 3.5, which is AMD's current integrated graphics architecture, built on a 4 nm process at TSMC. It is part of the Navi III IGP generation for Strix Point Mobile. The chip is labeled Krackan Point 2, indicating a low-power integrated design. The FP16 throughput is 716.8 GFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio to FP32, meaning it does not have dedicated half-rate or double-rate FP16 paths.

The RTX 4080 Max-Q uses Ada Lovelace, NVIDIA's mobile discrete architecture, built on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The chip is AD104, and the generation is GeForce 40 Mobile. The FP16 throughput is 20.04 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio to FP32. The NVIDIA part includes 58 RT cores for ray tracing and 232 tensor cores for AI workloads. The AMD part has only 2 RT cores and no tensor cores, so its feature set for ray tracing is minimal and it has no tensor-accelerated compute paths.

The memory architecture is fundamentally different. The AMD part relies on system shared memory, which means its bandwidth and capacity depend entirely on the host platform's memory configuration. The NVIDIA part uses dedicated GDDR6 with a fixed 192-bit bus and a fixed 432.0 GB/s bandwidth. This makes the RTX 4080 Max-Q a self-contained memory subsystem, while the Radeon 820M is at the mercy of the system's RAM.

The power envelope reflects the architectural intent. The 15 W TDP of the Radeon 820M suits fanless or low-noise designs with light workloads. The 60 W TDP of the RTX 4080 Max-Q requires active cooling and a larger power delivery system. Both are marked as IGP in slot width, but the NVIDIA part is clearly a discrete-class component in terms of die size, transistor count, and memory.

The Verdict

The data points to a simple conclusion: the RTX 4080 Max-Q is the superior part for any compute-intensive or graphics-intensive workload. Its FP32 throughput of 20.04 TFLOPS dwarfs the 716.8 GFLOPS of the Radeon 820M. Its pixel rate of 108.0 GPixel/s and texture rate of 313.2 GTexel/s are roughly 10 to 14 times higher than the AMD part. Its 12 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory with 432.0 GB/s bandwidth removes the system memory bottleneck that constrains the Radeon 820M.

The Radeon 820M is the appropriate choice only in systems where the 15 W power envelope is a hard limit. It cannot compete on any throughput metric, but it does not need to. It is an integrated part for basic display output, light media playback, and low-end 3D acceleration. Its 2800 MHz boost clock shows that it can react quickly to short bursts of demand, but it lacks the execution units to sustain heavy workloads.

The RTX 4080 Max-Q costs four times the power budget at 60 W, but it delivers roughly 28 times the FP32 throughput. That efficiency gap is the defining difference in this comparison. The RTX 4080 Max-Q also brings 58 RT cores and 232 tensor cores, features that the Radeon 820M almost entirely lacks. For any user or system designer who needs ray tracing, AI inference, high-resolution rendering, or high-bandwidth memory access, the RTX 4080 Max-Q is the only viable option in this pairing.

The Radeon 820M is not without merit. It is built on a newer 4 nm process, launches later in 2025, and fits into the processor package as a true IGP with no power connectors and a simple PCIe 4.0 x8 link. It also supports the same API feature set as the NVIDIA part, including DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. For a portable device that never pushes heavy graphics load, it provides a complete graphics solution at a fraction of the power draw.

The verdict, strictly from the recorded data, is that these parts serve different markets entirely. The Radeon 820M is a low-power integrated solution for compact and efficient devices. The RTX 4080 Max-Q is a high-performance mobile GPU for gaming laptops and mobile workstations. There is no recorded benchmark overlap, and the specification fields make it clear why: one part is designed to be adequate and efficient, the other is designed to be fast.