AMD Radeon 840M vs AMD Radeon PRO W7900 Comparison

The Verdict

The data presents a stark contrast between two AMD offerings aimed at completely different segments. The AMD Radeon 840M is an integrated graphics processor within the Krackan Point chip, designed for portable devices where power efficiency is paramount. The AMD Radeon PRO W7900 is a professional workstation card built for maximum compute throughput. The benchmark data shows the PRO W7900 sits in the 94th percentile of all GPUs, while the 840M holds the 50th percentile. This places the professional card in the upper echelon of graphics hardware, while the integrated solution sits at the median. Users requiring serious compute performance for professional workloads should select the PRO W7900. Users needing basic graphics capability within a thin, power-efficient laptop should rely on the 840M. The PRO W7900 delivers 61.32 TFLOPS of FP32 performance versus 1,484.8 GFLOPS for the 840M, a difference of over 40 times. The recorded Geekbench scores reinforce this gap, with the PRO W7900 achieving 84,379 in OpenCL and 137,070 in Vulkan. The 840M has no recorded benchmark scores in the database. The PRO W7900's average benchmark score of 110,725 places it within 1% of the AMD Radeon Pro Vega II, 2.8% behind the NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile, and 3.2% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro W6600X.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations. The 840M uses RDNA 3.5, while the PRO W7900 uses RDNA 3.0. This means the integrated part benefits from architectural refinements, but the discrete card compensates with raw scale. The manufacturing processes differ as well. The 840M is built on a 4 nm process at TSMC, while the PRO W7900 uses a 5 nm process, also at TSMC. The PRO W7900's chip, Navi 31 with the Plum Bonito codename, contains 57,700 million transistors across a 529 mm² die, achieving a transistor density of 109.1M per mm². The 840M's transistor count and die size are unknown. The PRO W7900 features 6,144 shading units, 384 texture mapping units, 192 raster output pipelines, and 96 ray tracing cores. The 840M has 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, 8 ROPs, and 4 ray tracing cores. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Both deliver FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32. The 840M's clock speeds show a 400 MHz base and 2,900 MHz boost, while the PRO W7900 operates at 1,760 MHz base and 2,495 MHz boost. The integrated part boosts higher, but the discrete card's massive parallel resources deliver far more throughput. The PRO W7900 belongs to the Radeon Pro Navi (Navi III Series) generation, while the 840M is part of the Navi III IGP (Strix Point Mobile) generation.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has more ray tracing cores?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7900 has 96 ray tracing cores. The AMD Radeon 840M has 4 ray tracing cores.

Q: What is the memory configuration of each GPU?

A: The PRO W7900 has 48 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 384-bit bus, with 864.0 GB/s of bandwidth and memory clocked at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective). The 840M uses system shared memory, with system dependent bandwidth.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The 840M has a 15 W TDP and requires no power connectors. The PRO W7900 has a 295 W TDP and uses 2x 8-pin power connectors, with a suggested PSU of 600 W.

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.

Q: What is the physical size of the PRO W7900?

A: The PRO W7900 measures 280 mm (11 inches) in length, 110 mm (4.3 inches) in height, and 51 mm (2 inches) in width, occupying a triple-slot form factor.

Q: When was each product released?

A: The 840M was released on 2025-02-28. The PRO W7900 was released on 2023-05-25.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every measured specification. The 840M uses the Krackan Point chip, while the PRO W7900 uses Navi 31. The 840M's process node is 4 nm versus 5 nm for the PRO W7900. The PRO W7900 has 57,700 million transistors on a 529 mm² die; the 840M's figures are unknown. Base clocks differ significantly: 400 MHz for the 840M versus 1,760 MHz for the PRO W7900. Boost clocks are closer, with 2,900 MHz for the 840M and 2,495 MHz for the PRO W7900. Memory configurations are entirely different. The 840M uses system shared memory, while the PRO W7900 has 48 GB of GDDR6 on a 384-bit bus with 864.0 GB/s bandwidth. The 840M's memory clock is listed as system shared, while the PRO W7900 runs at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective). Shading units number 256 for the 840M and 6,144 for the PRO W7900. TMUs are 16 versus 384. ROPs are 8 versus 192. Ray tracing cores are 4 versus 96. Pixel rate is 23.20 GPixel/s for the 840M versus 479.0 GPixel/s for the PRO W7900. Texture rate is 46.40 GTexel/s versus 958.1 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 1,484.8 GFLOPS versus 61.32 TFLOPS. FP16 performance matches the FP32 ratio at 1:1 for both. TDP is 15 W versus 295 W. The 840M is an IGP with no power connectors, while the PRO W7900 is triple-slot with 2x 8-pin connectors and a 600 W suggested PSU. The bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x8 for the 840M and PCIe 4.0 x16 for the PRO W7900. Display outputs are portable device dependent for the 840M, while the PRO W7900 offers 3x DisplayPort 2.1 and 1x mini-DisplayPort 2.1. The PRO W7900 has a launch MSRP of 3,999 USD.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark comparisons between the 840M and the PRO W7900. The 840M has no recorded benchmark scores and no nearest rivals listed. The PRO W7900, however, has two recorded Geekbench scores. In the OpenCL test, it scores 84,379. In the Vulkan test, it scores 137,070. Its average benchmark score across all tests is 110,725. This average places the PRO W7900 in the 94th percentile of all GPUs. The nearest rivals for the PRO W7900 provide context. The AMD Radeon Pro Vega II averages 109,617, which is 1% behind the PRO W7900. The NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile averages 113,944, putting it 2.8% ahead of the PRO W7900. The AMD Radeon Pro W6600X averages 107,342, which is 3.2% behind. The NVIDIA Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB averages 114,395, 3.2% ahead. These deltas show the PRO W7900 performing within a tight competitive band around its peers. The 840M's 50th percentile ranking indicates it sits at the median of all GPUs in the database. Without recorded benchmark scores, its exact performance relative to other integrated or entry-level discrete GPUs cannot be quantified. The production status for both products is listed as active.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon PRO W7900 wins in every measured performance category. Its 61.32 TFLOPS of FP32 compute dwarfs the 840M's 1,484.8 GFLOPS. The PRO W7900's 864.0 GB/s memory bandwidth, 479.0 GPixel/s pixel rate, and 958.1 GTexel/s texture rate are all far beyond the 840M's capabilities. The 48 GB frame buffer enables workloads that would be impossible with system shared memory. The 96 ray tracing cores provide substantial ray tracing throughput for rendering tasks. The PRO W7900's benchmark scores confirm its position in the 94th percentile, with an average score of 110,725. This card suits professional 3D rendering, scientific computation, and large-scale data processing where massive parallelism and memory capacity are essential. Its triple-slot design, 295 W TDP, and 2x 8-pin power connectors indicate a workstation or server environment with adequate cooling and power delivery.

The AMD Radeon 840M wins in efficiency and portability. Its 15 W TDP means it can operate within the thermal envelope of a thin laptop without dedicated cooling. The integrated design requires no power connectors and occupies no expansion slot. The 4 nm process node represents a more advanced manufacturing technology than the PRO W7900's 5 nm node. The 840M's boost clock of 2,900 MHz exceeds the PRO W7900's 2,495 MHz boost, showing that the integrated part can reach higher clock speeds when power allows. The 840M's PCIe 4.0 x8 interface provides adequate bandwidth for its system shared memory architecture. This GPU suits everyday computing, media playback, light productivity, and casual gaming where the host system's CPU and shared memory handle the workload. The 50th percentile ranking indicates median performance among all GPUs, which is respectable for an integrated solution. The 840M's display outputs depend on the portable device, allowing manufacturers to configure outputs as needed. The PRO W7900's fixed display output configuration includes 3x DisplayPort 2.1 and 1x mini-DisplayPort 2.1, catering to professional multi-monitor setups. Both GPUs share the same API support, so software compatibility is equal. The PRO W7900's release date of 2023-05-25 precedes the 840M's 2025-02-28 release, making the integrated part the newer product. The PRO W7900's predecessor is the Radeon Pro Vega, while the 840M's predecessor is the Navi II IGP. Neither product has a listed successor in the database.