AMD Radeon 840M vs AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains no head-to-head benchmark entries for either the AMD Radeon 840M or the AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU, and both units hold an identical percentile ranking of 50 among all GPUs. Their average benchmark scores are also equal at zero, which indicates that neither part has accumulated any measurable performance data in the current dataset. Without direct comparison results, the analysis must rely entirely on the architectural and specification fields provided in the database.

The absence of benchmark scores means there are no exact margins to cite for wins in either direction. What the data does confirm is that both GPUs share the same API support set: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. That parity places them on equal footing for feature-level software compatibility, but it says nothing about raw throughput. The Radeon 840M lists its FP32 compute at 1,484.8 GFLOPS, while the Ryzen Z2 Go GPU lists 4.147 TFLOPS, a difference that favors the latter by a substantial factor. Similarly, pixel rate for the 840M is 23.20 GPixel/s versus 86.40 GPixel/s for the Z2 Go GPU, and texture rate is 46.40 GTexel/s versus 129.6 GTexel/s. These are the only directly comparable performance metrics in the pack, and they uniformly point in one direction.

For FP16 throughput, the gap widens further. The Radeon 840M lists 1,484.8 GFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, meaning its FP16 and FP32 rates are identical. The Ryzen Z2 Go GPU lists 8.294 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio, which doubles its FP32 figure for half-precision work. That makes the Z2 Go GPU roughly 5.6 times faster in FP16 based on the listed numbers, a meaningful advantage for workloads that use reduced precision. The Radeon 840M, in contrast, offers no such acceleration, so any FP16 task runs at the same rate as FP32.

The database shows zero wins for either GPU in head-to-head comparisons, so there is no recorded evidence of the Radeon 840M taking any single benchmark. That does not mean it is without merit; it simply means the dataset has not captured any competitive results. The Ryzen Z2 Go GPU similarly holds zero wins, so neither part has a documented victory to claim. The only conclusion available from the numbers is that, on paper, the Ryzen Z2 Go GPU presents a much larger execution resource pool, and the Radeon 840M presents a much smaller one.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations and different process nodes. The AMD Radeon 840M uses the RDNA 3.5 architecture, built on a 4 nm TSMC process, and is classified under the Navi III IGP generation for Strix Point Mobile. Its chip is Krackan Point. The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU uses the older RDNA 2.0 architecture, built on a 6 nm TSMC process, and is classified as a Console GPU under the AMD generation. Its chip is Rembrandt+. The process node difference is direct: 4 nm versus 6 nm. The database also records a transistor count of 13,100 million for the Z2 Go GPU, a die size of 208 mm², and a transistor density of 63.0M per mm². The Radeon 840M lists its transistor count and die size as unknown, so no density figure can be computed for it.

Shading unit counts differ sharply. The Radeon 840M has 256 shading units, 16 texture mapping units, and 8 render output units. The Ryzen Z2 Go GPU has 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. Each of these is exactly three times larger on the Z2 Go GPU, which aligns with the threefold increase in pixel rate and texture rate noted earlier. Ray tracing cores follow the same pattern: 4 on the Radeon 840M versus 12 on the Ryzen Z2 Go GPU. Neither part lists tensor cores, so there is no neural accelerator data to compare.

Clock behavior differs as well. The Radeon 840M has a base clock of 400 MHz and a boost clock of 2900 MHz. The Ryzen Z2 Go GPU has a base clock of 800 MHz and a boost clock of 2700 MHz. The Z2 Go GPU starts higher but boosts lower, meaning the 840M has a larger clock range and a higher ceiling. However, the Z2 Go GPU compensates with far more execution units, so its aggregate throughput remains higher despite the lower boost frequency. The Radeon 840M also lists its memory as System Shared in capacity, type, and bus width, with bandwidth marked as System Dependent. The Ryzen Z2 Go GPU has dedicated memory specifications: 16 GB of LPDDR5 on a 128 bit bus, with 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth and a memory clock of 800 MHz at 6.4 Gbps effective. That is a fundamental difference in memory architecture, with the Z2 Go GPU using fixed, dedicated memory rather than borrowing from system RAM.

Power and interface fields also separate the two. The Radeon 840M has a TDP of 15 W, a PCIe 4.0 x8 bus interface, and display outputs listed as Portable Device Dependent. The Ryzen Z2 Go GPU has a TDP of 28 W, no bus interface listed, and a single USB Type-C display output. Both list no power connectors. The Radeon 840M is an IGP with a slot width of IGP, while the Z2 Go GPU has no slot width listed. Both are marked Active in production status. Release dates differ: the Radeon 840M was released on February 28, 2025, while the Ryzen Z2 Go GPU was released on December 31, 2024. The Radeon 840M lists its predecessor as Navi II IGP and has no successor. The Ryzen Z2 Go GPU lists neither predecessor nor successor.

The Verdict

The data directs a clear choice for users who prioritize raw throughput. The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU outclasses the AMD Radeon 840M in every measured compute and memory field in the database. Its FP32 rate of 4.147 TFLOPS is roughly 2.8 times the 840M's 1,484.8 GFLOPS. Its FP16 rate of 8.294 TFLOPS is roughly 5.6 times the 840M's FP16 figure. Its pixel rate of 86.40 GPixel/s is about 3.7 times the 840M's 23.20 GPixel/s, and its texture rate of 129.6 GTexel/s is about 2.8 times the 840M's 46.40 GTexel/s. It also carries 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, 32 ROPs, and 12 ray tracing cores, versus 256, 16, 8, and 4 respectively on the 840M. The Z2 Go GPU further benefits from 16 GB of dedicated LPDDR5 memory with 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth, while the 840M relies on system shared memory with bandwidth that is system dependent.

The Radeon 840M does hold advantages in a few fields. Its boost clock of 2900 MHz exceeds the Z2 Go GPU's 2700 MHz. Its 4 nm process node is smaller than the Z2 Go GPU's 6 nm node. Its TDP of 15 W is lower than the Z2 Go GPU's 28 W. And it uses the newer RDNA 3.5 architecture versus RDNA 2.0. These factors suggest the 840M is the more power-efficient part on paper, with a smaller process and a lower thermal envelope. But efficiency is not the same as capability. For any workload that stresses compute, graphics output, or memory bandwidth, the Z2 Go GPU has the numerical advantage in every recorded metric.

Neither GPU has a recorded benchmark score, so there is no empirical performance validation in the database. The percentile ranking of 50 for both parts indicates they sit at the median of the distribution, but with no actual scores behind that percentile, it functions as a placeholder rather than a measured outcome. The verdict from the specification data alone is straightforward: the Ryzen Z2 Go GPU is the stronger compute and graphics part, while the Radeon 840M is the more compact and power-conscious option.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across multiple specification fields in the database. Process node: 4 nm for the Radeon 840M, 6 nm for the Ryzen Z2 Go GPU. Architecture: RDNA 3.5 for the 840M, RDNA 2.0 for the Z2 Go GPU. Chip: Krackan Point for the 840M, Rembrandt+ for the Z2 Go GPU. Generation: Navi III IGP (Strix Point Mobile) for the 840M, Console GPU (AMD) for the Z2 Go GPU. Transistors: unknown for the 840M, 13,100 million for the Z2 Go GPU. Die size: unknown for the 840M, 208 mm² for the Z2 Go GPU. Transistor density: not listed for the 840M, 63.0M per mm² for the Z2 Go GPU.

Base clock: 400 MHz for the 840M, 800 MHz for the Z2 Go GPU. Boost clock: 2900 MHz for the 840M, 2700 MHz for the Z2 Go GPU. Memory clock: System Shared for the 840M, 800 MHz 6.4 Gbps effective for the Z2 Go GPU. Memory size: System Shared for the 840M, 16 GB for the Z2 Go GPU. Memory type: System Shared for the 840M, LPDDR5 for the Z2 Go GPU. Memory bus width: System Shared for the 840M, 128 bit for the Z2 Go GPU. Memory bandwidth: System Dependent for the 840M, 102.4 GB/s for the Z2 Go GPU.

Shading units: 256 for the 840M, 768 for the Z2 Go GPU. TMUs: 16 for the 840M, 48 for the Z2 Go GPU. ROPs: 8 for the 840M, 32 for the Z2 Go GPU. Ray tracing cores: 4 for the 840M, 12 for the Z2 Go GPU. Pixel rate: 23.20 GPixel/s for the 840M, 86.40 GPixel/s for the Z2 Go GPU. Texture rate: 46.40 GTexel/s for the 840M, 129.6 GTexel/s for the Z2 Go GPU. FP32: 1,484.8 GFLOPS for the 840M, 4.147 TFLOPS for the Z2 Go GPU. FP16: 1,484.8 GFLOPS (1:1) for the 840M, 8.294 TFLOPS (2:1) for the Z2 Go GPU.

TDP: 15 W for the 840M, 28 W for the Z2 Go GPU. Slot width: IGP for the 840M, not listed for the Z2 Go GPU. Bus interface: PCIe 4.0 x8 for the 840M, not listed for the Z2 Go GPU. Display outputs: Portable Device Dependent for the 840M, 1x USB Type-C for the Z2 Go GPU. Release date: February 28, 2025 for the 840M, December 31, 2024 for the Z2 Go GPU. Predecessor: Navi II IGP for the 840M, not listed for the Z2 Go GPU. Both list no successor, no launch MSRP, and identical API sets.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Radeon 840M has a boost clock of 2900 MHz, while the AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU has a boost clock of 2700 MHz.

Q: How much memory does the AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU have?

A: The Ryzen Z2 Go GPU has 16 GB of LPDDR5 memory on a 128 bit bus, with 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: What memory configuration does the AMD Radeon 840M use?

A: The Radeon 840M uses System Shared memory for capacity, type, and bus width, with bandwidth listed as System Dependent.

Q: What are the FP32 compute figures for both GPUs?

A: The Radeon 840M lists 1,484.8 GFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the Ryzen Z2 Go GPU lists 4.147 TFLOPS.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same APIs?

A: Yes, both list DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: What process nodes do the two GPUs use?

A: The Radeon 840M uses a 4 nm TSMC process, and the Ryzen Z2 Go GPU uses a 6 nm TSMC process.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen Z2 Go GPU wins in every raw performance category recorded in the database. It delivers 4.147 TFLOPS of FP32 compute against the Radeon 840M's 1,484.8 GFLOPS, and 8.294 TFLOPS of FP16 compute against the 840M's 1,484.8 GFLOPS. Its pixel rate of 86.40 GPixel/s is more than three times the 840M's 23.20 GPixel/s, and its texture rate of 129.6 GTexel/s is nearly three times the 840M's 46.40 GTexel/s. It has three times the shading units, three times the TMUs, four times the ROPs, and three times the ray tracing cores. Its dedicated 16 GB LPDDR5 memory with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth removes any dependency on system memory performance, unlike the 840M's System Shared configuration. The Z2 Go GPU is also the earlier release, dated December 31, 2024, and carries a transistor count of 13,100 million on a 208 mm² die.

The AMD Radeon 840M wins in efficiency and integration metrics. It has a lower TDP of 15 W versus 28 W for the Z2 Go GPU. It uses a smaller 4 nm process node versus 6 nm. Its boost clock of 2900 MHz is higher than the Z2 Go GPU's 2700 MHz. It is built on the newer RDNA 3.5 architecture versus RDNA 2.0. It is an IGP with a PCIe 4.0 x8 bus interface, whereas the Z2 Go GPU has no bus interface listed. The 840M's display outputs are Portable Device Dependent, while the Z2 Go GPU lists a single USB Type-C output. The 840M also has a predecessor listed as Navi II IGP, which the Z2 Go GPU lacks.

For use cases that require sustained compute throughput, high memory bandwidth, or heavy graphics workloads, the data favors the Ryzen Z2 Go GPU without qualification. For use cases that prioritize low power draw, a smaller process node, or a newer architecture generation, the Radeon 840M holds the advantage. Both parts share identical API support and production status, so software compatibility is not a differentiator. The database records no benchmark wins for either GPU, so the split between the two rests entirely on the specification fields. The Z2 Go GPU is the performance-oriented part; the 840M is the efficiency-oriented part.