AMD Radeon 840M vs AMD Radeon RX 6550S Comparison

FAQ

Q: What are the two GPUs compared in this database entry?

A: The AMD Radeon 840M and the AMD Radeon RX 6550S. The 840M is an integrated graphics processor from the Krackan Point chip, built on RDNA 3.5 architecture. The RX 6550S is a mobile discrete GPU from the Radeon RX 6000 series, based on the Navi 24 chip and RDNA 2.0 architecture.

Q: Which GPU has the higher shading unit count?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6550S has 1024 shading units, while the AMD Radeon 840M has only 256 shading units. This represents a 4:1 ratio in favor of the RX 6550S.

Q: What are the peak FP32 performance figures for both GPUs?

A: The RX 6550S reaches 4.915 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the 840M delivers 1,484.8 GFLOPS (approximately 1.485 TFLOPS). The RX 6550S is about 3.3 times higher in raw single-precision throughput.

Q: How much memory does each GPU use?

A: The RX 6550S has 4 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, with 128.0 GB/s bandwidth. The 840M uses system shared memory with bandwidth described as system dependent.

Q: What are the TDP figures for these two GPUs?

A: The 840M has a TDP of 15 W, while the RX 6550S has a TDP of 50 W. This means the RX 6550S consumes more than three times the power budget of the 840M.

Q: Which GPU uses the newer manufacturing process?

A: The 840M uses a 4 nm process at TSMC, while the RX 6550S uses a 6 nm process at TSMC. The 840M also has the newer architecture, RDNA 3.5, compared to the RX 6550S's RDNA 2.0.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations and are aimed at different segments within the mobile market. The AMD Radeon 840M is an integrated graphics processor, part of the Krackan Point chip, and belongs to the Navi III IGP (Strix Point Mobile) generation. It uses RDNA 3.5 architecture, which is a newer design than the RX 6550S's RDNA 2.0. The 840M is fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC, while the RX 6550S uses a 6 nm process. The RX 6550S belongs to the Navi Mobile (RX 6000M) generation and is built on the Navi 24 chip.

The transistor counts differ dramatically. The RX 6550S integrates 5,400 million transistors on a 107 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 50.5M per mm². The 840M's transistor count and die size are listed as unknown in the database, though its process node is smaller.

Compute resource allocation is heavily skewed toward the RX 6550S. The RX 6550S has 1024 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 32 render output units. The 840M has 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. Ray tracing hardware follows the same pattern: the RX 6550S has 16 RT cores, while the 840M has 4.

Clock behavior also differs. The 840M has a base clock of 400 MHz and a boost clock of 2900 MHz, which is a very wide range typical of integrated parts that scale with thermal headroom. The RX 6550S has a base clock of 2000 MHz, a boost clock of 2400 MHz, and a game clock of 2170 MHz. The memory clocks show a similar split: the 840M uses system shared memory, while the RX 6550S runs GDDR6 at 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective.

Both GPUs support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Neither has tensor cores. The bus interface differs: the 840M uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the RX 6550S uses PCIe 4.0 x4. Both have no power connectors and display outputs that are portable device dependent.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon RX 6550S wins on nearly every raw performance metric recorded in the database. Its pixel rate is 76.80 GPixel/s versus 23.20 GPixel/s for the 840M, a difference of about 3.3 times. Texture rate is 153.6 GTexel/s versus 46.40 GTexel/s, again about 3.3 times higher. FP32 compute is 4.915 TFLOPS versus 1,484.8 GFLOPS. The RX 6550S also has dedicated 4 GB GDDR6 memory with 128.0 GB/s bandwidth, which removes the variable performance of system shared memory.

The RX 6550S is the part for heavier graphics workloads. Its higher shading unit count, TMU count, ROP count, and RT core count make it the stronger candidate for gaming, 3D rendering, and any task that scales with parallel compute. The pixel and texture rates indicate it can drive higher resolutions and more detailed textures.

The AMD Radeon 840M wins on efficiency metrics. Its TDP is 15 W, compared to 50 W for the RX 6550S. It also uses a newer 4 nm process and newer RDNA 3.5 architecture. For thin-and-light systems where power draw is constrained, the 840M fits a much smaller power envelope. Its boost clock of 2900 MHz is higher than the RX 6550S's boost clock of 2400 MHz, which reflects the different design priorities: the 840M bursts to high clocks when needed but idles at very low clocks.

The 840M also uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface, twice the lane width of the RX 6550S's PCIe 4.0 x4. This could matter for bandwidth-sensitive workloads that rely on system memory access, though the RX 6550S's dedicated memory largely compensates for its narrower bus.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon 840M | AMD Radeon RX 6550S |

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

| Architecture | RDNA 3.5 | RDNA 2.0 |

| Generation | Navi III IGP (Strix Point Mobile) | Navi Mobile (RX 6000M) |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 6 nm |

| Transistors | Unknown | 5,400 million |

| Die Size | Unknown | 107 mm² |

| Transistor Density | Unknown | 50.5M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 400 MHz | 2000 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2900 MHz | 2400 MHz |

| Game Clock | None | 2170 MHz |

| Memory Size | System Shared | 4 GB |

| Memory Type | System Shared | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus Width | System Shared | 64 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | System Dependent | 128.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 256 | 1024 |

| TMUs | 16 | 64 |

| ROPs | 8 | 32 |

| RT Cores | 4 | 16 |

| Pixel Rate | 23.20 GPixel/s | 76.80 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 46.40 GTexel/s | 153.6 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 1,484.8 GFLOPS | 4.915 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 1,484.8 GFLOPS (1:1) | 9.830 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 15 W | 50 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | PCIe 4.0 x4 |

| Release Date | 2025-02-28 | 2023-01-03 |

| Predecessor | Navi II IGP | Polaris Mobile |

Both GPUs share the same manufacturer, TSMC foundry, DirectX 12 Ultimate support, OpenGL 4.6 support, Vulkan 1.4 support, IGP slot width, no power connectors, portable device dependent display outputs, and active production status.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database does not contain direct head-to-head benchmark scores between the AMD Radeon 840M and the AMD Radeon RX 6550S. The average benchmark score for both GPUs is recorded as 0, and both sit at the 50th percentile against all GPUs in the database. No nearest rival entries are listed for either part.

However, the recorded specification data provides a clear comparative picture. The most decisive gap is in FP32 compute: the RX 6550S delivers 4.915 TFLOPS against 1,484.8 GFLOPS for the 840M. That is roughly 3.3 times the raw compute throughput. In real workloads, this shows up in tasks like shader compilation, physics simulation, and general compute where FP32 operations dominate.

Pixel throughput tells a similar story. The RX 6550S pushes 76.80 GPixel/s versus 23.20 GPixel/s for the 840M. This matters most at higher resolutions and with heavy fragment shading. The texture rate gap is equally wide: 153.6 GTexel/s versus 46.40 GTexel/s, which affects how quickly textures can be sampled and filtered in 3D scenes.

The FP16 comparison is even more lopsided. The RX 6550S reaches 9.830 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio, while the 840M achieves 1,484.8 GFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio. The RX 6550S has more than six times the half-precision throughput. This is significant for machine learning inference and certain media processing workloads that use FP16 arithmetic.

Memory bandwidth is another major differentiator. The RX 6550S has a fixed 128.0 GB/s from its 4 GB GDDR6 pool on a 64-bit bus. The 840M depends on system shared memory, with bandwidth listed as system dependent. The RX 6550S's dedicated memory provides predictable performance and avoids contention with the CPU.

The clock speed comparison is nuanced. The 840M has a higher boost clock at 2900 MHz versus 2400 MHz for the RX 6550S, but the 840M's base clock is just 400 MHz versus 2000 MHz for the RX 6550S. This reflects the integrated part's strategy of aggressive boosting under light load, while the discrete part maintains a higher floor. The RX 6550S also carries a game clock of 2170 MHz, a metric absent from the 840M's specification.

Ray tracing hardware is another clear split. The RX 6550S has 16 RT cores, quadruple the 840M's 4 RT cores. While both support DirectX 12 Ultimate, the RX 6550S has substantially more dedicated hardware for ray-traced effects.

The RX 6550S launched earlier, with a release date of 2023-01-03, while the 840M is newer at 2025-02-28. The RX 6550S succeeds Polaris Mobile, and the 840M succeeds Navi II IGP. Both parts remain in active production.

Power consumption is the one metric where the 840M leads. Its 15 W TDP is less than a third of the RX 6550S's 50 W TDP. For mobile systems with limited thermal budgets, this is a decisive specification. The 840M also uses the smaller 4 nm process node, which helps explain its lower power draw despite the higher boost clock.

The data indicates that the RX 6550S is the stronger performer across every measured throughput metric, while the 840M offers a lower-power integrated alternative with a newer architecture and process. The choice between them depends on whether the system can accommodate the RX 6550S's higher power draw in exchange for roughly 3.3 times the compute, pixel, and texture throughput.