AMD Radeon 840M vs Intel Arc G3 Extreme Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains no head-to-head benchmark results for the AMD Radeon 840M and Intel Arc G3 Extreme. Both entries list empty benchmark arrays, zero wins for each side, and zero average benchmark scores. The percentile versus all GPUs is identical at 50 for both parts. Without measured performance data, any comparison of frame rates, compute throughput, or gaming results cannot be made from the available facts.

What can be derived from the specification data is theoretical throughput. The Intel Arc G3 Extreme delivers 7.680 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the AMD Radeon 840M delivers 1,484.8 GFLOPS. This means the Intel part offers roughly five times the raw single-precision floating-point throughput. In FP16, the Intel Arc G3 Extreme reaches 15.36 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, while the AMD Radeon 840M provides 1,484.8 GFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio. The pixel rate also diverges sharply: Intel records 60.00 GPixel/s versus AMD's 23.20 GPixel/s. Texture rate shows 120.0 GTexel/s for Intel and 46.40 GTexel/s for AMD.

These are theoretical maxima, not measured results. The data does not confirm whether either part sustains those rates under real workloads. The absence of benchmark scores means the database cannot rank either GPU against the other or against any external competitors. Both sit at the 50th percentile, which is the default value when no measurements exist.

Architecture Differences

The two integrated GPUs come from different manufacturers, process nodes, and architectural generations. The AMD Radeon 840M uses the Krackan Point chip built on RDNA 3.5 architecture, part of the Navi III IGP generation for Strix Point Mobile. The process node is 4 nm from TSMC. The Intel Arc G3 Extreme uses the Panther Lake chip built on Xe3-LPG architecture, part of the Arc Graphics-M generation for Panther Lake. The process node is 3 nm from Intel.

Shader resources differ substantially. The AMD Radeon 840M contains 256 shading units, 16 texture mapping units, 8 raster output pipelines, and 4 ray tracing cores. The Intel Arc G3 Extreme contains 1,536 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, 24 raster output pipelines, and 12 ray tracing cores. Intel's part has six times the shading units, three times the TMUs, three times the ROPs, and three times the RT cores.

Clock speeds show a different balance. The AMD part has a base clock of 400 MHz and a boost clock of 2900 MHz. The Intel part has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2500 MHz. AMD runs higher clocks, but Intel compensates with far more execution resources. The boost margin is 400 MHz in AMD's favor, yet Intel's wider layout produces higher theoretical throughput.

Memory configuration is identical in structure: both use system shared memory, with system shared bus width and system dependent bandwidth. Neither has dedicated VRAM. The bus interface differs, with AMD using PCIe 4.0 x8 and Intel listed simply as IGP.

API support matches exactly. Both report DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Display outputs are portable device dependent for both. Power connectors are none for both, and both are classified as IGP slot width.

Power consumption differs notably. The AMD Radeon 840M carries a TDP of 15 W. The Intel Arc G3 Extreme carries a TDP of 80 W. This is a fivefold difference in power envelope, which likely reflects the much larger shader array and higher theoretical throughput of the Intel part. The AMD part's lower power target suits thinner, lighter portable devices, while the Intel part demands more substantial cooling and battery capacity.

Release timing also differs. The AMD Radeon 840M released on 2025-02-28. The Intel Arc G3 Extreme released on 2026-05-31. The AMD predecessor is listed as Navi II IGP; the Intel part has no predecessor recorded. Both have active production status. Transistor counts and die sizes are unknown for both.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear split based on workload and platform constraints. The Intel Arc G3 Extreme is the higher-throughput part on paper. Its 7.680 TFLOPS FP32, 15.36 TFLOPS FP16, 60.00 GPixel/s pixel rate, and 120.0 GTexel/s texture rate all exceed the AMD Radeon 840M's corresponding figures by a wide margin. The Intel part also carries three times the RT cores, which suggests stronger ray tracing capability, though no benchmark confirms this.

The AMD Radeon 840M is the lower-power option. At 15 W TDP, it fits into systems where the Intel part's 80 W TDP would be impractical. Its higher boost clock of 2900 MHz versus 2500 MHz helps close the gap in latency-sensitive tasks, but the raw resource deficit remains. For thin-and-light laptops, the AMD part is the only plausible choice given the power budget. For larger notebooks or systems with adequate cooling, the Intel part offers far more theoretical compute.

Neither GPU has measured benchmark scores in the database. The verdict must rest on specifications alone. The Intel Arc G3 Extreme delivers roughly five times the FP32 throughput, roughly 2.6 times the pixel rate, and roughly 2.6 times the texture rate. It also has three times the RT cores. The AMD Radeon 840M delivers higher clocks and lower power. The choice depends on whether the platform can feed 80 W to the GPU.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute?

A: The Intel Arc G3 Extreme records 7.680 TFLOPS, while the AMD Radeon 840M records 1,484.8 GFLOPS.

Q: What are the TDP differences?

A: The AMD Radeon 840M has a TDP of 15 W. The Intel Arc G3 Extreme has a TDP of 80 W.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same APIs?

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

Q: How many ray tracing cores does each GPU have?

A: The AMD Radeon 840M has 4 RT cores. The Intel Arc G3 Extreme has 12 RT cores.

Q: What process nodes are used?

A: The AMD Radeon 840M uses a 4 nm node from TSMC. The Intel Arc G3 Extreme uses a 3 nm node from Intel.

Q: Which GPU has a higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Radeon 840M boosts to 2900 MHz. The Intel Arc G3 Extreme boosts to 2500 MHz.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc G3 Extreme wins in every theoretical throughput category recorded. FP32 compute is 7.680 TFLOPS versus 1,484.8 GFLOPS. FP16 compute is 15.36 TFLOPS versus 1,484.8 GFLOPS. Pixel rate is 60.00 GPixel/s versus 23.20 GPixel/s. Texture rate is 120.0 GTexel/s versus 46.40 GTexel/s. The Intel part has 1,536 shading units, 48 TMUs, 24 ROPs, and 12 RT cores. Ray tracing workloads, heavy compute tasks, and high-resolution rendering all favor the Intel part on paper.

The AMD Radeon 840M wins in power efficiency and clock speed. Its 15 W TDP is one-fifth of Intel's 80 W TDP. Its boost clock of 2900 MHz exceeds Intel's 2500 MHz. The AMD part also uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the Intel part lists IGP as its bus interface. For systems with strict thermal or battery constraints, the AMD part is the only feasible option. The lower power draw enables placement in devices where the Intel part would exceed thermal limits.

The AMD part also has a launch date roughly fifteen months earlier. It released on 2025-02-28, while the Intel part released on 2026-05-31. For early adoption, AMD holds the timing advantage. The Intel part has no predecessor recorded, while AMD lists Navi II IGP as its predecessor.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two parts:

• Manufacturer: AMD versus Intel
• Chip: Krackan Point versus Panther Lake
• Architecture: RDNA 3.5 versus Xe3-LPG
• Generation: Navi III IGP (Strix Point Mobile) versus Arc Graphics-M (Panther Lake)
• Process Node: 4 nm versus 3 nm
• Foundry: TSMC versus Intel
• Base Clock: 400 MHz versus 300 MHz
• Boost Clock: 2900 MHz versus 2500 MHz
• Shading Units: 256 versus 1,536
• TMUs: 16 versus 48
• ROPs: 8 versus 24
• RT Cores: 4 versus 12
• Pixel Rate: 23.20 GPixel/s versus 60.00 GPixel/s
• Texture Rate: 46.40 GTexel/s versus 120.0 GTexel/s
• FP32: 1,484.8 GFLOPS versus 7.680 TFLOPS
• FP16: 1,484.8 GFLOPS (1:1) versus 15.36 TFLOPS (2:1)
• TDP: 15 W versus 80 W
• Bus Interface: PCIe 4.0 x8 versus IGP
• Release Date: 2025-02-28 versus 2026-05-31
• Predecessor: Navi II IGP versus none

Fields that match include memory size, type, and bus width (all system shared), memory bandwidth (system dependent), power connectors (none), slot width (IGP), display outputs (portable device dependent), DirectX version (12 Ultimate 12_2), OpenGL version (4.6), Vulkan version (1.4), production status (active), launch MSRP (none recorded), and percentile versus all GPUs (50). Transistor counts and die sizes are unknown for both. Both have zero average benchmark scores and no nearest rivals recorded.