AMD Radeon 840M vs AMD Radeon RX 7700S Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive performance gap between the AMD Radeon 840M and the AMD Radeon RX 7700S, with the latter delivering substantially higher scores across all available tests. The RX 7700S holds an average benchmark score of 33,849, placing it in the 78th percentile of all GPUs in the database. The Radeon 840M, by contrast, has no recorded benchmark scores and sits in the 50th percentile, indicating a mid-tier position among all GPUs.

The most significant difference appears in compute-oriented workloads. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the RX 7700S achieves a score of 62,983. This result places it well above the Radeon 840M, which has no comparable measurement in the database. The OpenCL score reflects raw compute throughput, and the RX 7700S delivers 20.48 TFLOPS of FP32 performance versus 1,484.8 GFLOPS for the 840M. That is a 13.8x difference in theoretical FP32 output, and the benchmark result confirms the practical impact of that disparity.

Vulkan results tell a similar story. The RX 7700S records a Geekbench Vulkan score of 36,380, which is roughly 58% of its OpenCL score. The Radeon 840M has no Vulkan measurement in the database, so a direct comparison is not possible from recorded data alone. However, given the FP32 and memory bandwidth differences, the 840M would be expected to trail significantly in graphics API workloads.

The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, a modern ray-traced and rasterization workload, shows the RX 7700S scoring 2,185. This test stresses the GPU's RT cores and shading units simultaneously. The RX 7700S has 32 RT cores and 2,048 shading units, while the 840M has 4 RT cores and 256 shading units. That 8x difference in shading units and 8x difference in RT cores directly explains the expected performance gap in this workload.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 7700S wins decisively in every measurable category available in the database. Its 20.48 TFLOPS FP32 output, 288.0 GB/s memory bandwidth, and 160.0 GPixel/s pixel rate all point to a discrete-class mobile GPU designed for demanding workloads. The Geekbench OpenCL score of 62,983 indicates strong compute performance for tasks such as rendering, video encoding acceleration, and scientific calculations that leverage GPGPU APIs.

The Vulkan score of 36,380 shows the RX 7700S handles modern graphics APIs effectively, which matters for gaming under Vulkan-based engines. The 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 2,185 confirms it can manage ray-traced content at playable settings in mobile form factors, given its 32 RT cores and RDNA 3.0 architecture.

The Radeon 840M, with its 15 W TDP and IGP form factor, has no recorded wins in the database. Its role is inherently different: it is an integrated graphics solution for portable devices where power efficiency is prioritized over raw performance. Its 1,484.8 GFLOPS FP32 output and system-shared memory place it in the entry-level integrated segment. The 840M would be suitable for basic display output, light productivity, and older or less demanding games, but the database contains no benchmark scores to quantify those use cases directly.

The wins distribution in the head-to-head data is 0 for the 840M and 0 for the RX 7700S, because no head-to-head benchmark entries exist. The available data, however, makes the performance hierarchy unambiguous: the RX 7700S occupies a performance tier roughly 28 percentile points higher than the 840M in the overall GPU distribution.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs represent different points in AMD's RDNA evolution. The Radeon 840M uses the RDNA 3.5 architecture, built on a 4 nm TSMC process. It is part of the Navi III IGP generation for Strix Point Mobile and uses the Krackan Point chip. The RX 7700S uses RDNA 3.0, built on a 6 nm TSMC process, and belongs to the Navi Mobile (RX 7000M) generation with the Navi 33 chip.

The process node difference is notable: 4 nm versus 6 nm. The 840M is fabricated on a denser node, allowing more transistors per area despite its small die. The RX 7700S has a known transistor count of 13,300 million on a 204 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 65.2M per mm². The 840M's transistor count and die size are listed as unknown in the database, so no direct density comparison is possible.

Core configurations differ by an order of magnitude. The 840M has 256 shading units, 16 texture mapping units, 8 render output units, and 4 RT cores. The RX 7700S has 2,048 shading units, 128 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 32 RT cores. These are exact 8x multiples across all four categories, reflecting the discrete GPU's larger silicon allocation.

Clock behavior also diverges. The 840M has a base clock of 400 MHz and a boost clock of 2,900 MHz, which is a high boost ratio for an IGP. The RX 7700S has a base clock of 1,500 MHz, a game clock of 2,200 MHz, and a boost clock of 2,500 MHz. The 840M's boost clock is actually 400 MHz higher than the RX 7700S's boost clock, but the RX 7700S compensates with 8x the execution resources.

Memory architecture is a fundamental divider. The 840M uses system-shared memory, with type, bus width, and bandwidth all listed as system-dependent. The RX 7700S has 8 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The memory clock for the RX 7700S is 2,250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective data rate. The 840M's memory performance is entirely contingent on the host system's RAM configuration.

Pixel and texture throughput follow the core count ratios. The 840M produces 23.20 GPixel/s and 46.40 GTexel/s. The RX 7700S produces 160.0 GPixel/s and 320.0 GTexel/s. These are approximately 6.9x and 6.9x differences, respectively. FP16 performance shows a notable architectural split: the 840M has FP16 at 1,484.8 GFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio to FP32, while the RX 7700S has 40.96 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, meaning it processes FP16 at twice the rate of FP32.

The bus interface also differs: the 840M uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the RX 7700S uses PCIe 4.0 x16. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Power consumption is dramatically different, with the 840M rated at 15 W and the RX 7700S at 100 W. Both are classified as IGP in slot width, and both have no power connectors, indicating they draw power from the motherboard or laptop system rather than external PSU connections.

FAQ

Q: What is the average benchmark score difference between the two GPUs?

A: The RX 7700S has an average benchmark score of 33,849, while the Radeon 840M has no recorded average score, showing a score of 0 in the database.

Q: Which GPU has a higher boost clock?

A: The Radeon 840M has a boost clock of 2,900 MHz, which is 400 MHz higher than the RX 7700S's boost clock of 2,500 MHz.

Q: How much memory bandwidth does the RX 7700S provide?

A: The RX 7700S provides 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth through 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus.

Q: What is the architecture generation for each GPU?

A: The Radeon 840M uses RDNA 3.5, while the RX 7700S uses RDNA 3.0.

Q: How do the RT core counts compare?

A: The RX 7700S has 32 RT cores, which is 8 times the 4 RT cores found in the Radeon 840M.

Q: What is the TDP rating for each GPU?

A: The Radeon 840M is rated at 15 W, while the RX 7700S is rated at 100 W.

Specification Differences

The following table lists only the fields where the two GPUs differ according to the recorded data.

| Specification | AMD Radeon 840M | AMD Radeon RX 7700S |

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

| Series | None | Radeon RX 7000 series |

| Chip | Krackan Point | Navi 33 |

| Architecture | RDNA 3.5 | RDNA 3.0 |

| Codename | None | Hotpink Bonefish |

| Generation | Navi III IGP (Strix Point Mobile) | Navi Mobile (RX 7000M) |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 6 nm |

| Transistors | Unknown | 13,300 million |

| Die Size | Unknown | 204 mm² |

| Transistor Density | None | 65.2M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 400 MHz | 1,500 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2,900 MHz | 2,500 MHz |

| Game Clock | None | 2,200 MHz |

| Memory Clock | System Shared | 2,250 MHz, 18 Gbps effective |

| Memory Size | System Shared | 8 GB |

| Memory Type | System Shared | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus Width | System Shared | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | System Dependent | 288.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 256 | 2,048 |

| TMUs | 16 | 128 |

| ROPs | 8 | 64 |

| RT Cores | 4 | 32 |

| Pixel Rate | 23.20 GPixel/s | 160.0 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 46.40 GTexel/s | 320.0 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 1,484.8 GFLOPS | 20.48 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 1,484.8 GFLOPS (1:1) | 40.96 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 15 W | 100 W |

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

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

| Predecessor | Navi II IGP | Polaris Mobile |

| Percentile vs All GPUs | 50 | 78 |

| Average Benchmark Score | 0 | 33,849 |

The release dates show nearly two years between the two products, with the RX 7700S launching in January 2023 and the 840M arriving in February 2025. The RX 7700S's predecessor is listed as Polaris Mobile, while the 840M succeeds Navi II IGP. Both GPUs remain in active production status according to the database.