AMD Radeon 820M vs NVIDIA RTX 500 Mobile Ada Generation Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results for these two mobile graphics processors. Neither the AMD Radeon 820M nor the NVIDIA RTX 500 Mobile Ada Generation has any benchmark scores listed in the database, and their average benchmark scores are both recorded as zero. Their percentile ranks among all GPUs are identical at 50 percent, which places both parts at the exact midpoint of the database distribution, though this percentile value carries no comparative weight given the absence of measured performance data.

Because no benchmark runs were logged for either device, the head-to-head comparison must rely entirely on architectural and specification analysis rather than empirical performance measurements. The Radeon 820M delivers 716.8 GFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the RTX 500 Mobile Ada Generation delivers 8.294 TFLOPS, a difference of roughly 11.6 times in raw shader throughput. The pixel rate tells a similar story: the NVIDIA part reaches 64.80 GPixel/s against the AMD part's 11.20 GPixel/s, a factor of about 5.8. Texture rate favors NVIDIA by a smaller margin, with 129.6 GTexel/s versus 22.40 GTexel/s, approximately 5.8 times higher.

Memory bandwidth separates the two even more sharply. The RTX 500 Mobile uses 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, yielding 128.0 GB/s of dedicated bandwidth. The Radeon 820M relies on system shared memory with bandwidth recorded as system dependent, meaning its effective throughput varies with the host laptop's memory configuration and cannot be fixed as a comparable number. The NVIDIA solution's fixed 128.0 GB/s stands in contrast to the AMD part's variable, platform-dependent memory performance.

Clock behavior also differs. The Radeon 820M has a base clock of 400 MHz and a boost clock of 2800 MHz, a very wide operating range. The RTX 500 Mobile runs at a base of 1485 MHz and boosts to 2025 MHz, a narrower spread. Despite the AMD part's higher boost figure, the NVIDIA part's much larger shader count and memory subsystem produce the decisive compute advantage.

Neither part has any ray tracing or tensor core measurements that can be compared directly, though both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The absence of benchmark data means no per-application or per-workload victory can be assigned to either GPU from the database records.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw FP32 compute performance according to the database?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 500 Mobile Ada Generation delivers 8.294 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, which is approximately 11.6 times higher than the AMD Radeon 820M's 716.8 GFLOPS.

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in memory configuration?

A: The RTX 500 Mobile uses 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus with 128.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Radeon 820M uses system shared memory with a system dependent bandwidth, so its memory throughput cannot be stated as a fixed figure.

Q: What are the thermal design power ratings for each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon 820M has a TDP of 15 W, while the NVIDIA RTX 500 Mobile Ada Generation has a TDP of 35 W, more than double the AMD part's power envelope.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same graphics APIs?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, according to the recorded API lists.

Q: What manufacturing process nodes are used for each chip?

A: The AMD Radeon 820M uses TSMC's 4 nm process, while the NVIDIA RTX 500 Mobile Ada Generation uses TSMC's 5 nm process. Both are fabricated by TSMC.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units and texture mapping units?

A: The RTX 500 Mobile has 2048 shading units and 64 TMUs, compared to the Radeon 820M's 128 shading units and 8 TMUs. The NVIDIA part also has 32 ROPs versus the AMD part's 4 ROPs.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from fundamentally different architectural lineages. The AMD Radeon 820M uses the RDNA 3.5 architecture on a chip labeled Krackan Point 2, belonging to the Navi III IGP generation for Strix Point Mobile platforms. The NVIDIA RTX 500 Mobile Ada Generation uses the Ada Lovelace architecture on the AD107 chip, part of the Ada-MW (x000A) generation. Both are integrated graphics solutions with an IGP slot width and no power connectors, but their internal designs diverge significantly.

The Radeon 820M is built on TSMC's 4 nm process node, while the RTX 500 Mobile uses TSMC's 5 nm node. The NVIDIA chip's transistor count is recorded as 18,900 million on a die size of 159 mm², giving a transistor density of 118.9 million per mm². The AMD chip's transistor count and die size are both listed as unknown, so no density comparison is possible from the recorded data.

Compute resource allocation differs by an order of magnitude. The Radeon 820M has 128 shading units, 8 texture mapping units, 4 raster output units, and 2 ray tracing cores. The RTX 500 Mobile has 2048 shading units, 64 TMUs, 32 ROPs, 16 ray tracing cores, and 64 tensor cores. The AMD part lists no tensor cores at all, while the NVIDIA part includes a dedicated tensor core array, which indicates support for AI-accelerated workloads that the AMD IGP cannot match through dedicated hardware.

Ray tracing capability exists on both, but with different core counts: 2 on the AMD part and 16 on the NVIDIA part. Both GPUs report FP16 performance at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, meaning neither uses a split or doubled FP16 execution path. The Radeon 820M's FP16 figure equals its FP32 figure at 716.8 GFLOPS, and the RTX 500 Mobile's FP16 equals its FP32 at 8.294 TFLOPS.

The memory architectures are fundamentally different. The Radeon 820M uses system shared memory for both capacity and type, with a system shared bus width and system dependent bandwidth. The RTX 500 Mobile has dedicated 4 GB GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus with fixed 128.0 GB/s bandwidth. This dedicated memory arrangement gives the NVIDIA part predictable memory performance independent of the host system's RAM configuration.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every recorded specification field. The process nodes differ: 4 nm for AMD versus 5 nm for NVIDIA. The RTX 500 Mobile has a recorded transistor count of 18,900 million and die size of 159 mm², while the Radeon 820M's transistor count and die size are unknown. The NVIDIA chip's transistor density is 118.9 million per mm², a figure not available for the AMD chip.

Clock speeds differ in both base and boost values. The Radeon 820M runs at 400 MHz base and 2800 MHz boost. The RTX 500 Mobile runs at 1485 MHz base and 2025 MHz boost. The AMD part's boost clock is 775 MHz higher, but its base clock is 1085 MHz lower. The memory clock also differs: the RTX 500 Mobile operates at 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective transfer, while the Radeon 820M's memory clock is listed as system shared.

Shading units, TMUs, and ROPs all favor NVIDIA by large margins: 2048 versus 128 shading units, 64 versus 8 TMUs, and 32 versus 4 ROPs. Ray tracing cores number 16 on NVIDIA versus 2 on AMD. Tensor cores exist only on NVIDIA at 64 count, with none listed for AMD. Pixel rate is 64.80 GPixel/s for NVIDIA versus 11.20 GPixel/s for AMD. Texture rate is 129.6 GTexel/s for NVIDIA versus 22.40 GTexel/s for AMD. FP32 and FP16 compute are 8.294 TFLOPS for NVIDIA versus 716.8 GFLOPS for AMD in both precision modes.

Thermal design power differs substantially: 35 W for NVIDIA versus 15 W for AMD. Both use PCIe 4.0 x8 bus interfaces and have portable device dependent display outputs. Both support the same API set of DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The release dates differ, with NVIDIA launching on 2024-02-26 and AMD on 2025-03-01. The NVIDIA part's predecessor is Ampere-MW and successor is Blackwell-MW, while the AMD part's predecessor is Navi II IGP with no successor recorded. Production status is active for both.

The Verdict

The recorded data shows a clear compute hierarchy between these two mobile GPUs. The NVIDIA RTX 500 Mobile Ada Generation holds decisive advantages in every measured compute category, including FP32 throughput, pixel rate, texture rate, shading units, ray tracing cores, and memory bandwidth. The AMD Radeon 820M counters with a lower thermal design power of 15 W versus 35 W, a smaller process node at 4 nm versus 5 nm, and a higher boost clock at 2800 MHz versus 2025 MHz.

For workloads that depend on raw shader throughput, the RTX 500 Mobile's 8.294 TFLOPS against 716.8 GFLOPS makes the comparison one-sided. The NVIDIA part's dedicated 128.0 GB/s memory bandwidth also removes the platform dependency that the Radeon 820M carries with its system shared memory arrangement. The RTX 500 Mobile's 64 tensor cores provide dedicated hardware for AI tasks, while the Radeon 820M has no tensor core capability recorded.

The Radeon 820M's advantages are limited to power efficiency and process technology. Its 15 W TDP is less than half of the NVIDIA part's 35 W, and its 4 nm node is one generation smaller than the 5 nm node used by NVIDIA. These factors matter for thermally constrained ultraportable designs, but they do not compensate for the compute gap in the recorded specifications.

The database shows no benchmark scores for either GPU, so the verdict rests on architectural specification analysis rather than measured performance. Based on those specifications, the RTX 500 Mobile Ada Generation is the higher-performing part by a wide margin across all compute metrics. The Radeon 820M is the lower-power integrated option for systems where the 15 W envelope takes priority over graphics throughput.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA RTX 500 Mobile Ada Generation wins in every performance-oriented category recorded in the database. Its FP32 compute of 8.294 TFLOPS dwarfs the AMD part's 716.8 GFLOPS, making it the clear choice for compute-heavy applications such as 3D rendering, video encoding, and general GPU-accelerated workloads. Its pixel rate of 64.80 GPixel/s versus 11.20 GPixel/s gives it a strong advantage in fill-rate-bound scenarios. The texture rate of 129.6 GTexel/s versus 22.40 GTexel/s further reinforces its dominance in texture-heavy rendering.

The NVIDIA part's 16 ray tracing cores versus the AMD part's 2 ray tracing cores positions it ahead for ray-traced graphics workloads, assuming the software can utilize those cores. The 64 tensor cores provide dedicated AI acceleration hardware that the AMD part lacks entirely. The fixed 128.0 GB/s memory bandwidth from dedicated GDDR6 memory gives the NVIDIA part predictable performance regardless of the host system's RAM configuration, unlike the AMD part's system dependent bandwidth.

The AMD Radeon 820M wins in power efficiency and integration footprint. Its 15 W TDP is less than half of the NVIDIA part's 35 W, making it suitable for thinner, lighter laptops with smaller cooling solutions. Its 4 nm process node is smaller than NVIDIA's 5 nm node, which may contribute to lower power draw per transistor. The AMD part's 2800 MHz boost clock is higher than NVIDIA's 2025 MHz, though this does not translate into a compute advantage given the vastly different shader counts.

For systems where battery life and thermal limits take precedence over graphics performance, the Radeon 820M's 15 W envelope and system shared memory architecture reduce hardware complexity and power draw. For systems where graphics throughput, ray tracing, tensor acceleration, and dedicated memory bandwidth are required, the RTX 500 Mobile Ada Generation is the superior choice based on the recorded specifications. The database contains no benchmark results to challenge this specification-based conclusion.