AMD Radeon 840M vs Intel Arc A580 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded benchmark data for the Intel Arc A580 shows three separate test results, each placing the card at a specific performance level. In the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, the Arc A580 scores 2,229 points. In Geekbench OpenCL, the card achieves 91,657 points, and in Geekbench Vulkan, it reaches 79,381 points. These three results combine to produce an average benchmark score of 57,756 for the Arc A580.

The AMD Radeon 840M has no recorded benchmark entries in the database. Its average benchmark score is listed as zero, and its percentile ranking against all GPUs is 50. The Intel Arc A580, by comparison, sits at the 87th percentile against all GPUs. This difference in percentile placement indicates that the Arc A580 outperforms the vast majority of graphics processors in the database, while the Radeon 840M occupies a middle-ground position based on its hardware characteristics rather than direct test results.

The nearest rivals for the Intel Arc A580 provide context for its standing. The AMD Radeon RX 5600 OEM posts an average score of 58,085, which is 0.6 percent lower than the Arc A580. The AMD Radeon RX 9070 GRE records 57,367, a 0.7 percent deficit. The Intel Arc A570M scores 58,239, sitting 0.8 percent higher than the A580. The AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT achieves 58,392, which is 1.1 percent above the A580. These narrow margins show that the Arc A580 clusters tightly with a group of established discrete graphics cards, with all four rivals falling within roughly one percent of its average score.

Because the Radeon 840M has no direct benchmarks, the head-to-head comparison relies on the architectural and specification differences between the two products. The Arc A580 delivers 12.29 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the Radeon 840M delivers 1,484.8 GFLOPS, which converts to approximately 1.48 TFLOPS. This represents an 8.3-fold advantage for the Intel product in raw shader throughput. The texture rate for the Arc A580 is 384.0 GTexel/s versus 46.40 GTexel/s for the Radeon 840M, an 8.3-fold difference as well. Pixel rates show a similar story: the Arc A580 outputs 192.0 GPixel/s, while the Radeon 840M manages 23.20 GPixel/s, an 8.3-fold gap.

Memory bandwidth further separates the two. The Arc A580 uses 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 512.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Radeon 840M relies on system shared memory, with bandwidth listed as system dependent. This means the integrated GPU's memory performance varies with the host system's RAM configuration, whereas the discrete card has a fixed, dedicated bandwidth figure.

The Verdict

The data indicates two products aimed at entirely different segments. The Intel Arc A580 is a discrete add-in board with a dual-slot cooler, two 8-pin power connectors, and a 175 W thermal design power. It requires a 450 W recommended power supply. The AMD Radeon 840M is an integrated graphics processor with a 15 W thermal design power, no power connectors, and no slot width because it is built into the processor package.

Benchmark results confirm the Arc A580's position among mid-range discrete GPUs. Its average score of 57,756 places it alongside the Radeon RX 5600 OEM, Radeon RX 9070 GRE, Arc A570M, and Radeon RX 6950 XT, all within 1.1 percent of each other. The card's 87th percentile ranking against all GPUs means it outperforms roughly seven out of eight graphics processors in the database.

The Radeon 840M, with no recorded benchmarks, cannot be placed in the same performance tier. Its FP32 throughput of 1,484.8 GFLOPS and 256 shading units indicate a design intended for lightweight tasks, not for competing with a card that has 3,072 shading units and 192 texture mapping units.

Users seeking a discrete GPU for gaming or compute workloads should look at the Arc A580 based on its tested performance data. Users with a system already containing a Radeon 840M integrated GPU should understand that its capabilities are far below the Arc A580, as shown by the raw throughput figures, but no benchmark scores exist to quantify the exact difference in real-world applications.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon 840M uses the Krackan Point chip built on the RDNA 3.5 architecture. It belongs to the Navi III IGP generation for Strix Point Mobile. The process node is 4 nm at TSMC. The Intel Arc A580 uses the DG2-512 chip based on the Xe-HPG architecture, part of the Alchemist generation under the Arc 5 family. It is built on a 6 nm TSMC process.

The transistor counts differ substantially. The Arc A580 contains 21,700 million transistors on a 406 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 53.4 million transistors per square millimeter. The Radeon 840M's transistor count and die size are listed as unknown in the database. This means the integrated GPU's physical design cannot be compared directly, but the process node difference suggests the AMD product uses a more advanced manufacturing technology.

The Radeon 840M has 256 shading units, 16 texture mapping units, and 8 render output units. It includes 4 ray tracing cores. The Arc A580 has 3,072 shading units, 192 texture mapping units, and 96 render output units, with 24 ray tracing cores. The Intel part has 12 times the shading units, 12 times the TMUs, 12 times the ROPs, and 6 times the ray tracing cores compared to the AMD integrated solution.

Memory architecture differs fundamentally. The Radeon 840M shares system memory with the host CPU, with no dedicated VRAM, no fixed bus width, and bandwidth dependent on the system configuration. The Arc A580 has its own 8 GB GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus with a fixed 512.0 GB/s bandwidth. The memory clock for the Arc A580 is 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective data rate. The Radeon 840M's memory clock is listed as system shared, meaning it operates at whatever speed the host system's RAM provides.

Clock speeds show a different design philosophy. The Radeon 840M has a base clock of 400 MHz and a boost clock of 2900 MHz. The Arc A580 has a base clock of 1700 MHz and a boost clock of 2000 MHz. Despite the AMD part's higher boost clock, its far lower shading unit count results in much lower aggregate throughput.

Both products support DirectX 12 Ultimate with feature level 12_2, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The bus interface differs: the Radeon 840M uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the Arc A580 uses PCIe 4.0 x16. The display outputs for the Radeon 840M are listed as portable device dependent, reflecting its integrated nature. The Arc A580 provides 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 2.0 outputs.

The Radeon 840M has a release date of February 28, 2025, and its predecessor is listed as Navi II IGP. The Arc A580 was released on October 9, 2023, with a predecessor of Xe Graphics and a successor of Battlemage. Both products are currently marked as active in production status.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher FP32 compute throughput?

A: The Intel Arc A580 delivers 12.29 TFLOPS of FP32 compute. The AMD Radeon 840M delivers 1,484.8 GFLOPS, which is approximately 1.48 TFLOPS. The Arc A580 has roughly 8.3 times the FP32 throughput.

Q: How much memory does each GPU have?

A: The Intel Arc A580 has 8 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus with 512.0 GB/s bandwidth. The AMD Radeon 840M uses system shared memory, with size, type, bus width, and bandwidth all dependent on the host system.

Q: What are the thermal design power ratings?

A: The AMD Radeon 840M has a thermal design power of 15 W. The Intel Arc A580 has a thermal design power of 175 W. The Arc A580 requires two 8-pin power connectors and a recommended 450 W power supply, while the Radeon 840M needs no power connectors.

Q: How does the Intel Arc A580 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Arc A580 has an average benchmark score of 57,756. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 5600 OEM (58,085, 0.6 percent lower), the AMD Radeon RX 9070 GRE (57,367, 0.7 percent higher), the Intel Arc A570M (58,239, 0.8 percent lower), and the AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT (58,392, 1.1 percent lower). All four rivals fall within about one percent of the A580's score.

Q: What is the percentile ranking for each GPU?

A: The Intel Arc A580 ranks at the 87th percentile against all GPUs in the database. The AMD Radeon 840M ranks at the 50th percentile. The Arc A580's benchmark results place it well above the median, while the Radeon 840M sits at the midpoint of all recorded GPUs.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units and ray tracing cores?

A: The Intel Arc A580 has 3,072 shading units and 24 ray tracing cores. The AMD Radeon 840M has 256 shading units and 4 ray tracing cores. The Arc A580 has 12 times the shading units and 6 times the ray tracing cores.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc A580 wins in every measured performance category. Its FP32 throughput of 12.29 TFLOPS dwarfs the Radeon 840M's 1,484.8 GFLOPS. Its texture rate of 384.0 GTexel/s exceeds the Radeon's 46.40 GTexel/s. Its pixel rate of 192.0 GPixel/s exceeds 23.20 GPixel/s. The Arc A580 also has 3,072 shading units versus 256, 192 TMUs versus 16, 96 ROPs versus 8, and 24 ray tracing cores versus 4.

The Arc A580's dedicated memory subsystem gives it another clear advantage. With 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus and 512.0 GB/s bandwidth, it does not compete with the host system for memory resources. The Radeon 840M's system shared memory means its performance scales with the host's RAM speed and capacity, introducing variability that the discrete card does not face.

The Arc A580 also wins on display connectivity. It provides 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 2.0 outputs. The Radeon 840M's display outputs are listed as portable device dependent, meaning they vary by laptop or system design. For desktop users, the Arc A580's fixed output configuration offers predictable multi-monitor support.

The AMD Radeon 840M wins on power efficiency. Its 15 W thermal design power is dramatically lower than the Arc A580's 175 W. The Arc A580 requires two 8-pin power connectors and a 450 W power supply, while the Radeon 840M uses no additional power connectors. For systems where power draw and cooling are constrained, the integrated solution presents a clear advantage. The Radeon 840M also benefits from having no slot width requirement, fitting into any laptop or compact device without occupying an expansion slot.

The Radeon 840M's higher boost clock of 2900 MHz versus 2000 MHz for the Arc A580 suggests that in lightly threaded or short-duration workloads that depend on clock speed rather than raw core count, the integrated part may respond quickly. However, the Arc A580's 12-fold advantage in shading units means any sustained workload will favor the discrete card.

The bus interface also favors the Arc A580. It uses PCIe 4.0 x16, providing 16 lanes for data transfer. The Radeon 840M uses PCIe 4.0 x8, half the lane count. For workloads that move large amounts of data between the GPU and system memory, the x16 interface gives the Arc A580 more headroom.

The Radeon 840M's 4 nm process node from TSMC is more advanced than the Arc A580's 6 nm node. This process advantage contributes to the Radeon's low power consumption, but it does not overcome the massive difference in execution resources and memory bandwidth.

The Intel Arc A580 also has a newer successor, Battlemage, indicating an active product roadmap. The Radeon 840M has no successor listed. Both products are active in production, so neither is discontinued.

For users with existing test results, the Arc A580's average benchmark score of 57,756 and its 87th percentile ranking provide concrete performance expectations. The Radeon 840M has no benchmark entries, so its real-world performance can only be inferred from its architectural specifications. The database records the Radeon 840M at the 50th percentile based on its hardware profile, but without measured scores, this ranking carries less certainty than the Arc A580's tested results.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every specification field. The AMD Radeon 840M uses RDNA 3.5 architecture on a 4 nm TSMC process with the Krackan Point chip. The Intel Arc A580 uses Xe-HPG architecture on a 6 nm TSMC process with the DG2-512 chip. The Radeon 840M has unknown transistor count and die size. The Arc A580 has 21,700 million transistors on a 406 mm² die with a density of 53.4M per mm².

Clock speeds differ significantly. The Radeon 840M runs at 400 MHz base and 2900 MHz boost. The Arc A580 runs at 1700 MHz base and 2000 MHz boost. Memory clocks show the Radeon 840M using system shared memory, while the Arc A580 operates at 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective speed.

Memory specifications are completely different. The Radeon 840M has system shared memory with no dedicated size, type, bus width, or bandwidth. The Arc A580 has 8 GB GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 512.0 GB/s bandwidth.

The execution units differ by an order of magnitude. The Radeon 840M has 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, 8 ROPs, and 4 ray tracing cores. The Arc A580 has 3,072 shading units, 192 TMUs, 96 ROPs, and 24 ray tracing cores.

Throughput figures follow the same pattern. The Radeon 840M achieves 23.20 GPixel/s pixel rate, 46.40 GTexel/s texture rate, and 1,484.8 GFLOPS FP32. The Arc A580 achieves 192.0 GPixel/s, 384.0 GTexel/s, and 12.29 TFLOPS FP32. FP16 performance also differs: the Radeon 840M has 1,484.8 GFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio to FP32, while the Arc A580 has 24.58 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio.

Power requirements are at opposite ends of the spectrum. The Radeon 840M draws 15 W, uses no power connectors, and has an IGP slot width. The Arc A580 draws 175 W, requires two 8-pin connectors, has a dual-slot form factor, and needs a 450 W power supply.

The bus interface differs as well. The Radeon 840M uses PCIe 4.0 x8. The Arc A580 uses PCIe 4.0 x16. Display outputs are portable device dependent for the Radeon 840M, while the Arc A580 offers 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 2.0.

Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Radeon 840M was released on February 28, 2025, with a predecessor of Navi II IGP and no successor. The Arc A580 was released on October 9, 2023, with a predecessor of Xe Graphics and a successor of Battlemage. Both are active products. Neither has a launch MSRP listed in the database.