AMD Radeon 820M vs NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation Comparison

FAQ

Q: What are the core architectural differences between the AMD Radeon 820M and the NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation?

A: The Radeon 820M uses AMD's RDNA 3.5 architecture on a 4 nm TSMC process, while the RTX 4000 SFF uses NVIDIA's Ada Lovelace architecture on a 5 nm TSMC process. The RTX 4000 SFF has 6144 shading units, 192 TMUs, 64 ROPs, 48 RT cores, and 192 tensor cores, compared to the Radeon 820M's 128 shading units, 8 TMUs, 4 ROPs, and 2 RT cores.

Q: What is the performance percentile ranking for each GPU?

A: The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation sits at the 95th percentile among all GPUs in the database, while the Radeon 820M sits at the 50th percentile. This indicates the RTX 4000 SFF is positioned far higher in the overall performance distribution.

Q: What benchmark scores are recorded for the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation?

A: The database records a Geekbench OpenCL score of 124,812 and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 109,364 for the RTX 4000 SFF. Its average benchmark score is 117,088. No benchmark scores are recorded for the Radeon 820M.

Q: How much memory does each GPU have, and what type is it?

A: The RTX 4000 SFF has 20 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 160-bit bus with 280.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Radeon 820M uses system shared memory, with the size, type, and bus width all listed as system dependent.

Q: What are the power and physical specifications for each card?

A: The Radeon 820M has a 15 W TDP, is an IGP with no power connectors, and uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface. The RTX 4000 SFF has a 70 W TDP, is dual-slot, has no power connectors, requires a 250 W suggested PSU, and uses a PCIe 4.0 x16 interface.

Q: What are the release dates for these two products?

A: The AMD Radeon 820M was released on February 28, 2025. The NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation was released on March 20, 2023.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon 820M and NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation represent fundamentally different design philosophies. The Radeon 820M is an integrated graphics processor built on the Krackan Point 2 chip using RDNA 3.5 architecture, fabricated on TSMC's 4 nm process. It belongs to the Navi III IGP generation for Strix Point Mobile. In contrast, the RTX 4000 SFF is a discrete workstation card built on the AD104 chip using Ada Lovelace architecture, fabricated on TSMC's 5 nm process, and belongs to the Workstation Ada generation.

The transistor counts and die sizes differ dramatically. The RTX 4000 SFF contains 35,800 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 121.8M per mm². The Radeon 820M's transistor count and die size are listed as unknown in the database. This scale difference directly reflects the divergent target markets: the Radeon 820M is designed for power-constrained mobile integration, while the RTX 4000 SFF is built for workstation-class compute.

The compute resources vary by orders of magnitude. The Radeon 820M has 128 shading units, 8 TMUs, 4 ROPs, and 2 RT cores. The RTX 4000 SFF has 6144 shading units, 192 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 48 RT cores. Additionally, the RTX 4000 SFF includes 192 tensor cores, a feature entirely absent from the Radeon 820M's specification. These differences manifest in theoretical performance: the Radeon 820M delivers 716.8 GFLOPS FP32 and 11.20 GPixel/s pixel rate, while the RTX 4000 SFF delivers 19.17 TFLOPS FP32 and 99.84 GPixel/s pixel rate.

Clock speeds also differ. The Radeon 820M has a base clock of 400 MHz and a boost clock of 2800 MHz. The RTX 4000 SFF has a base clock of 720 MHz and a boost clock of 1560 MHz. The Radeon 820M's higher boost clock partially compensates for its far smaller compute core count, but the sheer difference in parallel processing elements remains decisive.

Memory architecture separates these two products completely. The Radeon 820M relies on system shared memory with bandwidth listed as system dependent. The RTX 4000 SFF has 20 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory on a 160-bit bus delivering 280.0 GB/s bandwidth. This dedicated high-bandwidth memory is critical for workstation workloads that the RTX 4000 SFF targets.

Both GPUs support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Radeon 820M uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface and outputs to portable device dependent displays. The RTX 4000 SFF uses PCIe 4.0 x16 and provides 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. The physical form factors differ: the Radeon 820M is an IGP, while the RTX 4000 SFF is dual-slot with dimensions of 168 mm length and 69 mm height.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark comparisons between the Radeon 820M and the RTX 4000 SFF. However, the recorded benchmark data for the RTX 4000 SFF provides context for its performance tier. The Geekbench OpenCL score of 124,812 and Geekbench Vulkan score of 109,364 place it well above typical integrated graphics solutions.

The RTX 4000 SFF's nearest rivals in the database include the NVIDIA GB10 with an average score of 117,393 (0.3% higher), the AMD Radeon PRO W7700 with an average score of 118,976 (1.6% higher), the NVIDIA Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB with an average score of 114,395 (2.4% lower), and the NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile with an average score of 113,944 (2.8% lower). This clustering shows the RTX 4000 SFF performing within a narrow band around 117,000 average benchmark score, competing closely with professional and workstation-class GPUs.

The Radeon 820M has no recorded benchmarks and no nearest rivals in the database. Its 50th percentile ranking suggests it sits near the middle of all GPUs, but without benchmark scores, quantitative comparison against the RTX 4000 SFF is impossible. The 95th percentile ranking for the RTX 4000 SFF indicates it outperforms the vast majority of GPUs in the database, while the Radeon 820M sits at the median.

Based on the available data, the RTX 4000 SFF's average benchmark score of 117,088 represents a performance level approximately 163 times higher than the Radeon 820M's average benchmark score of 0. However, this comparison is limited because the Radeon 820M's score of 0 reflects the absence of benchmark entries rather than measured performance.

The Verdict

The data clearly positions these two GPUs in entirely different market segments. The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation is a high-performance workstation card at the 95th percentile of all GPUs, with dedicated 20 GB GDDR6 memory, 6144 shading units, and 192 tensor cores. The Radeon 820M is an integrated graphics solution at the 50th percentile, with 128 shading units and system shared memory.

The RTX 4000 SFF delivers 19.17 TFLOPS FP32 performance versus the Radeon 820M's 716.8 GFLOPS, a 26.7x difference in raw compute throughput. Pixel rate differs by 8.9x (99.84 GPixel/s versus 11.20 GPixel/s). Texture rate differs by 13.4x (299.5 GTexel/s versus 22.40 GTexel/s). Memory bandwidth is 280.0 GB/s for the RTX 4000 SFF versus system dependent for the Radeon 820M.

The power envelopes tell an equally clear story. The Radeon 820M draws 15 W TDP, appropriate for ultraportable devices. The RTX 4000 SFF draws 70 W TDP and requires a 250 W suggested PSU, appropriate for workstation desktops. These are not competing products; they serve different physical platforms and workload requirements.

Users needing professional workstation performance with ray tracing (48 RT cores), AI acceleration (192 tensor cores), and large dedicated memory (20 GB GDDR6) should select the RTX 4000 SFF. Users needing minimal power consumption in an integrated form factor for portable devices should select the Radeon 820M. The performance gap is so substantial that no workload would be equally well served by both.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon 820M | NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation |

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

| Architecture | RDNA 3.5 | Ada Lovelace |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 5 nm |

| Transistors | Unknown | 35,800 million |

| Die Size | Unknown | 294 mm² |

| Base Clock | 400 MHz | 720 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2800 MHz | 1560 MHz |

| Memory Size | System Shared | 20 GB |

| Memory Type | System Shared | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus Width | System Shared | 160 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | System Dependent | 280.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 128 | 6144 |

| TMUs | 8 | 192 |

| ROPs | 4 | 64 |

| RT Cores | 2 | 48 |

| Tensor Cores | None | 192 |

| Pixel Rate | 11.20 GPixel/s | 99.84 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 22.40 GTexel/s | 299.5 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 716.8 GFLOPS | 19.17 TFLOPS |

| TDP | 15 W | 70 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | None |

| Suggested PSU | None | 250 W |

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

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a |

| Release Date | 2025-02-28 | 2023-03-20 |

| Predecessor | Navi II IGP | Workstation Ampere |

| Successor | None | Blackwell PRO W |

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation wins decisively in every measured compute category. Its 19.17 TFLOPS FP32 performance versus 716.8 GFLOPS makes it the clear choice for compute-heavy workloads such as scientific simulation, rendering, and data processing. The 48 RT cores versus 2 RT cores gives it a substantial advantage in ray-traced graphics workloads. The 192 tensor cores provide AI acceleration capabilities that the Radeon 820M cannot offer at all.

The RTX 4000 SFF's 20 GB GDDR6 memory with 280.0 GB/s bandwidth supports large datasets and textures that would exceed the system shared memory available to the Radeon 820M. The 99.84 GPixel/s pixel rate and 299.5 GTexel/s texture rate enable high-resolution rendering and detailed texture work. The 6144 shading units provide massive parallel processing throughput for graphics and general compute.

The Radeon 820M wins in power efficiency and physical integration. Its 15 W TDP versus 70 W TDP makes it suitable for thin-and-light laptops and portable devices where power budget is critical. As an IGP, it requires no additional card slot, no power connectors, and integrates directly into the mobile platform. Its 2800 MHz boost clock demonstrates an aggressive clock strategy for an integrated part, partially offsetting its small core count.

The Radeon 820M's release date of February 2025 makes it a newer product than the RTX 4000 SFF's March 2023 release. However, newer does not translate to higher performance in this case. The RTX 4000 SFF's 95th percentile ranking versus the Radeon 820M's 50th percentile ranking confirms the substantial performance gap.

For portable computing, everyday graphics, and power-constrained applications, the Radeon 820M provides adequate performance with minimal power draw. For professional workstation tasks requiring maximum compute throughput, large dedicated memory, ray tracing, and AI acceleration, the RTX 4000 SFF is the only viable choice between these two. The data shows no overlap in their optimal use cases.