AMD Radeon 840M vs AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU Comparison

FAQ

Q: What are the architecture differences between the AMD Radeon 840M and the AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU?

A: The Radeon 840M uses RDNA 3.5 architecture on the Krackan Point chip, while the Ryzen Z2 GPU uses RDNA 3.0 on the Hawk Point chip. Both are built on a 4 nm TSMC process node.

Q: How do the core counts compare?

A: The Ryzen Z2 GPU has 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, 32 render output units, and 12 ray tracing cores. The Radeon 840M has 256 shading units, 16 texture mapping units, 8 render output units, and 4 ray tracing cores.

Q: Which GPU has higher clock speeds?

A: The Radeon 840M has a higher boost clock at 2900 MHz compared to the Ryzen Z2 GPU's 2700 MHz. However, the Ryzen Z2 GPU has a higher base clock at 800 MHz versus 400 MHz for the Radeon 840M.

Q: What are the memory specifications for each GPU?

A: The Ryzen Z2 GPU features 16 GB of LPDDR5X memory on a 128-bit bus with 119.9 GB/s bandwidth. The Radeon 840M uses system shared memory with bandwidth described as system dependent.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The Radeon 840M has a TDP of 15 W, while the Ryzen Z2 GPU has a TDP of 28 W.

Q: What is the pixel rate difference?

A: The Ryzen Z2 GPU delivers a pixel rate of 86.40 GPixel/s, which is nearly four times higher than the Radeon 840M's 23.20 GPixel/s.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs represent different architectural generations within AMD's integrated graphics lineup. The Radeon 840M is based on RDNA 3.5, the newer architecture, and is built on the Krackan Point chip. This places it in the Navi III IGP generation for Strix Point Mobile. The Ryzen Z2 GPU uses RDNA 3.0 on the Hawk Point chip and is classified as a Console GPU generation.

Both GPUs are manufactured on a 4 nm process at TSMC, so the fundamental transistor technology is identical. However, the die characteristics differ substantially. The Ryzen Z2 GPU has a die size of 178 mm² and contains 25,390 million transistors, resulting in a transistor density of 142.6M per mm². The Radeon 840M's transistor count and die size are not recorded in the database.

The compute architecture scales significantly between the two. The Ryzen Z2 GPU contains three times the shading units (768 versus 256), three times the texture mapping units (48 versus 16), and four times the render output units (32 versus 8) compared to the Radeon 840M. Ray tracing hardware also scales by a factor of three, with 12 ray tracing cores on the Ryzen Z2 GPU versus 4 on the Radeon 840M.

Clock behavior differs in a way that reflects their intended roles. The Radeon 840M has a lower base clock of 400 MHz but boosts to 2900 MHz, indicating a power-conscious design that can reach high clocks when needed. The Ryzen Z2 GPU starts at a higher 800 MHz base clock but boosts to 2700 MHz. The higher base clock on the Ryzen Z2 GPU suggests sustained performance is prioritized, while the Radeon 840M relies on burst behavior.

Both GPUs support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API feature parity is complete. Neither GPU has dedicated tensor cores recorded in the database.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records no direct head-to-head benchmark scores between these two GPUs, and neither has an average benchmark score listed. However, the raw throughput metrics reveal a decisive performance hierarchy.

The most dramatic difference appears in FP32 compute. The Ryzen Z2 GPU delivers 8.294 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the Radeon 840M delivers 1,484.8 GFLOPS, which converts to 1.4848 TFLOPS. This means the Ryzen Z2 GPU provides approximately 5.6 times the single-precision compute throughput. The FP16 numbers mirror this exactly: 8.294 TFLOPS for the Ryzen Z2 GPU and 1,484.8 GFLOPS for the Radeon 840M, with both operating at a 1:1 ratio to FP32.

Texture throughput follows the same pattern. The Ryzen Z2 GPU achieves 129.6 GTexel/s, while the Radeon 840M manages 46.40 GTexel/s. This is a 2.8 times advantage for the Ryzen Z2 GPU, driven by its three times larger TMU count partially offset by its lower boost clock.

Pixel throughput shows the largest relative gap. The Ryzen Z2 GPU renders at 86.40 GPixel/s, which is 3.7 times the Radeon 840M's 23.20 GPixel/s. The ROP count difference (32 versus 8) explains most of this gap, with the clock difference playing a smaller role.

Memory bandwidth is another major separator. The Ryzen Z2 GPU has dedicated 16 GB of LPDDR5X memory on a 128-bit bus, yielding 119.9 GB/s of bandwidth. The Radeon 840M uses system shared memory with bandwidth described as system dependent, meaning its performance ceiling depends on the host platform's memory configuration. In any realistic comparison, the Ryzen Z2 GPU's dedicated memory subsystem provides a substantial advantage.

Both GPUs share the same percentile ranking in the database at 50th percentile versus all GPUs, and both have an average benchmark score of 0, indicating that no benchmark data has been recorded for either part yet.

Specification Differences

The following specifications differ between the two GPUs:

| Specification | AMD Radeon 840M | AMD Ryzen Z2 GPU |

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

| Architecture | RDNA 3.5 | RDNA 3.0 |

| Chip | Krackan Point | Hawk Point |

| Generation | Navi III IGP (Strix Point Mobile) | Console GPU (AMD) |

| Transistors | unknown | 25,390 million |

| Die Size | unknown | 178 mm² |

| Transistor Density | not recorded | 142.6M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 400 MHz | 800 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2900 MHz | 2700 MHz |

| Memory Size | System Shared | 16 GB |

| Memory Type | System Shared | LPDDR5X |

| Memory Bus Width | System Shared | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | System Dependent | 119.9 GB/s |

| Memory Clock | System Shared | 937 MHz 7.5 Gbps effective |

| Shading Units | 256 | 768 |

| TMUs | 16 | 48 |

| ROPs | 8 | 32 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | 4 | 12 |

| Pixel Rate | 23.20 GPixel/s | 86.40 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 46.40 GTexel/s | 129.6 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 1,484.8 GFLOPS | 8.294 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 1,484.8 GFLOPS (1:1) | 8.294 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 15 W | 28 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | not recorded |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 1x USB Type-C |

| Release Date | 2025-02-28 | 2024-12-31 |

Both GPUs share the same manufacturer, process node (4 nm), foundry (TSMC), power connector configuration (none), DirectX support (12 Ultimate 12_2), OpenGL support (4.6), Vulkan support (1.4), production status (Active), and percentile ranking (50th).

The Verdict

The recorded data indicates a clear performance hierarchy. The Ryzen Z2 GPU is the substantially more powerful part across every compute metric in the database, with roughly 5.6 times the FP32 throughput, 3.7 times the pixel rate, 2.8 times the texture rate, and three times the shading units of the Radeon 840M. Its dedicated 16 GB LPDDR5X memory subsystem with 119.9 GB/s bandwidth removes the system memory dependency that constrains the Radeon 840M.

The Radeon 840M counters with architectural advantages that matter in specific contexts. Its RDNA 3.5 architecture is newer than the Ryzen Z2 GPU's RDNA 3.0. It also has a higher boost clock at 2900 MHz versus 2700 MHz, which could translate to lower latency in burst workloads. Its 15 W TDP is nearly half the Ryzen Z2 GPU's 28 W TDP, making it the more power-efficient option for thermally constrained designs.

The Ryzen Z2 GPU's classification as a Console GPU generation, combined with its 16 GB memory allocation and 128-bit bus, points toward sustained high-throughput workloads. The Radeon 840M's classification as a Mobile IGP with PCIe 4.0 x8 interface and portable device dependent display outputs indicates a different intended environment.

Neither part has recorded benchmark scores or nearest rivals in the database, so the comparison rests entirely on specification-level analysis. The percentile rankings are identical at 50, which means neither part has differentiated itself in aggregate GPU rankings yet.

Where Each One Wins

The Ryzen Z2 GPU wins in scenarios that demand raw throughput. Applications that stress FP32 compute, such as general-purpose GPU computing or heavy graphics workloads, will favor its 8.294 TFLOPS capability. Rasterization-heavy tasks benefit from its 86.40 GPixel/s pixel rate and 129.6 GTexel/s texture rate. The 12 ray tracing cores provide three times the ray tracing hardware of the Radeon 840M, so ray-traced content will perform at a higher level. The dedicated 16 GB LPDDR5X memory with 119.9 GB/s bandwidth ensures that memory-intensive workloads do not contend with the host system for bandwidth. The higher 800 MHz base clock means sustained loads maintain a higher performance floor.

The Radeon 840M wins in power-constrained and latency-sensitive scenarios. Its 15 W TDP allows deployment in systems where the 28 W TDP of the Ryzen Z2 GPU would be prohibitive. The higher 2900 MHz boost clock provides a responsiveness advantage in short, bursty workloads that do not sustain long enough to thermally throttle. The newer RDNA 3.5 architecture incorporates architectural refinements that may improve efficiency per clock in certain instruction patterns. Its PCIe 4.0 x8 interface, while not as flexible as a dedicated memory bus, enables direct system memory access without the overhead of discrete GPU traversal. The system shared memory design means the Radeon 840M scales with whatever memory the host platform provides, which can be an advantage in configurations where high-bandwidth system memory is already present.

For gaming workloads with modest resolution and detail settings, the Radeon 840M's 1,484.8 GFLOPS FP32 throughput and 23.20 GPixel/s pixel rate can handle lighter titles. For demanding games or compute workloads, the Ryzen Z2 GPU's 8.294 TFLOPS and 86.40 GPixel/s provide the necessary headroom. The absence of benchmark scores in the database means these conclusions derive from the specification deltas, which are decisive in favor of the Ryzen Z2 GPU for raw performance and in favor of the Radeon 840M for efficiency and burst responsiveness.