AMD Radeon 840M vs AMD Radeon RX 9070 GRE Comparison

The Verdict

The database shows two AMD parts that occupy completely separate segments. The Radeon 840M is an integrated graphics processor built into the Krackan Point mobile chip, while the Radeon RX 9070 GRE is a discrete, dual-slot add-in board from the Radeon RX 9000 series. The RX 9070 GRE sits in the 87th percentile of all GPUs in the database, whereas the 840M sits at the 50th percentile. That gap is enormous and makes them almost non-competitors.

For anyone building or buying a thin-and-light laptop with the 840M, the data confirms it is a capable IGP for everyday graphics and light gaming, but it cannot replace a discrete GPU. The RX 9070 GRE, by contrast, is a serious desktop card. Its average benchmark score of 57,367 places it within 1.8% of the Radeon RX 6950 XT, and it trades blows with the Intel Arc A580 (0.7% behind), the RX 5600 OEM (1.2% behind), and the Arc A570M (1.5% behind). The recorded data shows the 9070 GRE is competitive with those established cards, making it a sensible pick for a high-refresh 1080p or 1440p desktop build.

The 840M has no benchmark entries in the database, so its percentile ranking of 50 is based purely on its specifications and position in the IGP class. The verdict is simple: choose the 840M only when a discrete GPU is impossible due to portability constraints, and choose the RX 9070 GRE whenever a desktop system with a 550 W recommended PSU is acceptable. There is no scenario in the data where the 840M matches the discrete card in raw performance.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations. The 840M uses RDNA 3.5, while the RX 9070 GRE uses RDNA 4.0. Both are fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC, but the chip designs diverge sharply. The 840M is built on the Krackan Point chip, a mobile-oriented part, while the RX 9070 GRE uses the Navi 48 chip from the Navi IV (RX 9000) generation.

The RX 9070 GRE has 53,900 million transistors on a 357 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 151.0M per mm². The 840M's transistor count and die size are not recorded in the database. The 840M is part of the Navi III IGP (Strix Point Mobile) generation, whereas the RX 9070 GRE belongs to the Navi IV (RX 9000) family. The 840M's predecessor is listed as Navi II IGP, and the RX 9070 GRE's predecessor is Navi III, so they come from adjacent but distinct product lineages.

Both support the same API feature set: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The 840M uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 bus interface, while the RX 9070 GRE uses PCIe 5.0 x16, which affects available bandwidth for data transfer. The 840M draws 15 W, making it an IGP with no power connectors, while the RX 9070 GRE is rated at 220 W and requires two 8-pin power connectors. These architectural differences explain why the performance gap is so wide.

Where Each One Wins

The 840M wins in power efficiency and form factor. At 15 W, it is designed for portable devices, with display outputs that are portable-device dependent. It uses system-shared memory, meaning its bandwidth is system dependent and its memory bus is shared with the CPU. That makes it the sole option for ultra-thin laptops where a discrete GPU cannot physically fit.

The RX 9070 GRE wins decisively in every performance metric recorded. It has 12 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, delivering 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Its pixel rate of 267.8 GPixel/s and texture rate of 535.7 GTexel/s dwarf the 840M's 23.20 GPixel/s and 46.40 GTexel/s. The FP32 compute is 34.28 TFLOPS versus 1,484.8 GFLOPS (1.48 TFLOPS) for the 840M, a roughly 23-fold difference. The 840M has 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, 8 ROPs, and 4 RT cores. The RX 9070 GRE has 3,072 shading units, 192 TMUs, 96 ROPs, and 48 RT cores. That is 12 times the shading units, 12 times the TMUs, 12 times the ROPs, and 12 times the RT cores.

The 840M's 50th percentile ranking indicates it sits at the midpoint of all GPUs in the database, which is respectable for an integrated part. The RX 9070 GRE's 87th percentile ranking places it well above most alternatives. For gaming, the RX 9070 GRE has the memory capacity and bandwidth to handle modern textures, while the 840M is limited by system-shared memory. The 840M's boost clock of 2900 MHz is higher than the RX 9070 GRE's 2790 MHz boost, but that does not compensate for the massive resource disparity.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in the database benchmarks?

A: The RX 9070 GRE has recorded benchmark scores: 5,424 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 and 109,309 in Geekbench OpenCL. The 840M has no benchmark entries in the database.

Q: How does the RX 9070 GRE compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The nearest rivals are the Intel Arc A580 (0.7% lower average score), AMD Radeon RX 5600 OEM (1.2% lower), Intel Arc A570M (1.5% lower), and AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT (1.8% lower).

Q: Can the 840M play modern games?

A: The 840M is an integrated GPU with 256 shading units and system-shared memory. Its 50th percentile ranking suggests it handles light gaming, but its pixel rate of 23.20 GPixel/s and texture rate of 46.40 GTexel/s are far below discrete GPU levels.

Q: What memory does the RX 9070 GRE use?

A: The RX 9070 GRE uses 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus with 432.0 GB/s bandwidth and a memory clock of 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective).

Q: What power connectors does each GPU require?

A: The 840M has no power connectors and a 15 W TDP. The RX 9070 GRE requires two 8-pin connectors and a 220 W TDP, with a suggested PSU of 550 W.

Q: Which GPU is more recent?

A: The 840M was released on 2025-02-28, and the RX 9070 GRE was released on 2025-05-07, so the RX 9070 GRE is the newer product.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

There are no direct head-to-head benchmark entries in the database, so the comparison must rely on the available recorded metrics. The RX 9070 GRE's 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 5,424 and Geekbench OpenCL score of 109,309 are the only concrete benchmark results. The 840M has none, which itself indicates the performance gap.

The FP32 compute difference is stark. The RX 9070 GRE delivers 34.28 TFLOPS, while the 840M delivers 1,484.8 GFLOPS. That is 23.1 times more compute in the discrete card, a margin that no clock speed advantage can close. The 840M's boost clock of 2900 MHz is only 110 MHz higher than the 9070 GRE's 2790 MHz, yet the 9070 GRE has 12 times the shading units. The texture rate difference is larger still: 535.7 GTexel/s versus 46.40 GTexel/s, an 11.5-fold gap. The pixel rate gap is similar at 267.8 GPixel/s versus 23.20 GPixel/s, an 11.5-fold difference.

Memory bandwidth tells the same story. The RX 9070 GRE has a fixed 432.0 GB/s, while the 840M's bandwidth is "System Dependent," meaning it can vary based on the laptop's memory configuration. Even in a best-case scenario, system-shared memory cannot approach the dedicated GDDR6 bandwidth of the discrete card. The RX 9070 GRE's 12 GB VRAM also gives it a capacity advantage over shared memory, which is split between CPU and GPU workloads.

The RX 9070 GRE's average benchmark score of 57,367 places it in a tight cluster with its nearest rivals, all within 1.8% of each other. That consistency suggests the card delivers stable, competitive performance across the board. The 840M's average benchmark score is 0 in the database, reflecting the absence of recorded tests, not a literal zero performance.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every measurable specification. The 840M uses RDNA 3.5 architecture on the Krackan Point chip; the RX 9070 GRE uses RDNA 4.0 on the Navi 48 chip. The 840M's process node is 4 nm at TSMC; the RX 9070 GRE is also 4 nm at TSMC, but with 53,900 million transistors on a 357 mm² die.

Clock speeds differ: the 840M has a base clock of 400 MHz and a boost of 2900 MHz, while the RX 9070 GRE has a base of 1420 MHz, a game clock of 2220 MHz, and a boost of 2790 MHz. Memory configurations are entirely different: the 840M uses system-shared memory with a system-dependent bus and bandwidth, while the RX 9070 GRE has 12 GB GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus at 432.0 GB/s.

Compute resources: the 840M has 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, 8 ROPs, and 4 RT cores. The RX 9070 GRE has 3,072 shading units, 192 TMUs, 96 ROPs, and 48 RT cores. The 840M's pixel rate is 23.20 GPixel/s and its texture rate is 46.40 GTexel/s. The RX 9070 GRE's pixel rate is 267.8 GPixel/s and its texture rate is 535.7 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 1,484.8 GFLOPS versus 34.28 TFLOPS, and both have FP16 at 1:1 ratio.

Power and physical specs: the 840M is an IGP with 15 W TDP, no power connectors, and a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface. The RX 9070 GRE is a dual-slot card with 220 W TDP, two 8-pin connectors, a 550 W suggested PSU, and a PCIe 5.0 x16 interface. Display outputs: the 840M is portable-device dependent, while the RX 9070 GRE has 1x HDMI 2.1b and 3x DisplayPort 2.1a. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The RX 9070 GRE has a launch MSRP of 549 USD.