AMD Radeon 840M vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4010 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results between the AMD Radeon 840M and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4010. The head-to-head field is empty, and neither part has a recorded win in a comparative test. This absence of direct measurement data is itself informative: the two products occupy different segments and have never been placed in the same test session by the database.

What the database does provide is a single benchmark score for the RTX 4010. In the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, the RTX 4010 records a score of 2893. This places it at the 18th percentile of all GPUs in the database, meaning 82 percent of recorded graphics processors score higher. The AMD Radeon 840M has no benchmark entry at all, and its average benchmark score is recorded as 0, with a percentile rank of 50. The percentile figure for the 840M does not derive from actual test data, as the score field confirms, so direct numerical comparison between the two is not possible from the available measurements.

The nearest rivals listed for the RTX 4010 provide context for its single score. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16 GB averages 2907, which is 0.5 percent higher than the RTX 4010's result. The NVIDIA RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell SFF averages 2910, a 0.6 percent advantage. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 8 GB averages 2913, 0.7 percent ahead. The NVIDIA Quadro P600 averages 2923, a 1 percent lead. These deltas are remarkably small, indicating that the RTX 4010's Steel Nomad score sits within one percent of four other distinct products. The RTX 4010 effectively matches the performance class of those rivals in this specific workload, despite the wide generational and architectural gaps among them.

The absence of any score for the 840M means the database cannot confirm whether it would outperform or trail the RTX 4010 in any test. The data only shows that the RTX 4010 has been measured once, while the 840M has not been measured at all in the recorded benchmark suite.

The Verdict

The data supports only one clear conclusion: the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4010 is a measured, active product with a known benchmark result, while the AMD Radeon 840M has no recorded performance data. Anyone selecting between these two parts strictly from the database must rely on the RTX 4010's single score and the architectural and specification differences, not on comparative test results.

The RTX 4010 delivers a 2893 score in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, a result that sits within 1 percent of four nearest rivals. That places it in a narrow performance band where the RTX 4060 Ti 16 GB, RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell SFF, RTX 4060 Ti 8 GB, and Quadro P600 all cluster. The 840M has no equivalent measurement, so the database offers no evidence of its absolute or relative performance.

For a system builder choosing between an integrated graphics processor and a discrete single-slot card, the recorded data favors the RTX 4010 on the basis of verified performance alone. The 840M may be adequate for its intended integrated role, but the database cannot substantiate any claim about its speed. The RTX 4010, by contrast, has a concrete score and a percentile rank that shows it below most of the GPU population but competitive with a specific set of near-neighbor products.

FAQ

Q: Does the AMD Radeon 840M have any recorded benchmark score in the database?

A: No. The 840M has an empty benchmark list, an average benchmark score of 0, and no nearest rivals listed.

Q: What is the RTX 4010's score in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12?

A: The RTX 4010 records a score of 2893 in that test, with an average benchmark score of 2893.

Q: How does the RTX 4010 compare to its closest rival, the RTX 4060 Ti 16 GB?

A: The RTX 4060 Ti 16 GB averages 2907, which is 0.5 percent higher than the RTX 4010's 2893.

Q: Which GPU has the higher percentile rank, the 840M or the RTX 4010?

A: The 840M shows a percentile rank of 50, while the RTX 4010 shows 18. However, the 840M's rank is not supported by any benchmark score, whereas the RTX 4010's rank derives from its measured 2893 result.

Q: Are the two GPUs from the same architecture generation?

A: No. The 840M uses RDNA 3.5 (Krackan Point), while the RTX 4010 uses Ampere (GA107). The 840M is on a 4 nm TSMC process, and the RTX 4010 is on an 8 nm Samsung process.

Q: What memory configuration does each GPU use?

A: The 840M uses system-shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth. The RTX 4010 uses 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus with 96.00 GB/s bandwidth.

Specification Differences

The two products differ across nearly every measurable specification field. The AMD Radeon 840M is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with a 15 W TDP, while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4010 is a single-slot discrete card with a 50 W TDP and a 250 W suggested power supply. The 840M requires no power connectors; the RTX 4010 also uses no power connectors, drawing power from the slot.

The 840M operates at a 400 MHz base clock and 2900 MHz boost clock. The RTX 4010 runs at 1417 MHz base and 1762 MHz boost. The 840M's memory is system shared with no fixed size, type, bus width, or bandwidth; the RTX 4010 has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus delivering 96.00 GB/s, with a memory clock of 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective).

Shader resources differ substantially. The 840M has 256 shading units, 16 texture mapping units, and 8 ROPs. The RTX 4010 has 768 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The 840M includes 4 ray tracing cores and no tensor cores. The RTX 4010 has 6 ray tracing cores and 24 tensor cores.

Pixel and texture rates reflect the clock and unit differences. The 840M delivers 23.20 GPixel/s and 46.40 GTexel/s. The RTX 4010 delivers 28.19 GPixel/s and 42.29 GTexel/s. Floating-point throughput is 1,484.8 GFLOPS for the 840M (both FP32 and FP16 at a 1:1 ratio) versus 2.706 TFLOPS for the RTX 4010 (also 1:1 for FP16).

Physical specifications diverge: the 840M is an IGP with no slot width, length, height, or width recorded, and its display outputs are portable-device dependent. The RTX 4010 is 163 mm (6.4 inches) long, 69 mm (2.7 inches) tall, single-slot, and offers 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. Both use a PCIe 4.0 x8 bus interface.

The process nodes differ: 4 nm TSMC for the 840M versus 8 nm Samsung for the RTX 4010. The RTX 4010 has recorded transistor data of 8,700 million on a 200 mm² die, with a density of 43.5M per mm². The 840M's transistor count and die size are unknown.

Release timing also differs. The 840M released on 2025-02-28, while the RTX 4010 released on 2024-04-15. The 840M's predecessor is Navi II IGP, while the RTX 4010's predecessor is GeForce 30 and its successor is GeForce 50.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon 840M uses the RDNA 3.5 architecture on the Krackan Point chip, belonging to the Navi III IGP generation for Strix Point Mobile. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4010 uses the Ampere architecture on the GA107 chip, part of the GeForce 40-series. These are fundamentally different designs: RDNA 3.5 is AMD's integrated graphics architecture tailored for mobile processors, while Ampere is NVIDIA's discrete GPU architecture from the prior generation.

The manufacturing processes differ significantly. The 840M is built on TSMC's 4 nm node, while the RTX 4010 uses Samsung's 8 nm node. The 840M's transistor count and die size are not recorded, but the RTX 4010 packs 8,700 million transistors into a 200 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 43.5M per mm².

The compute layout diverges in structure. The 840M deploys 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 8 ROPs, with 4 ray tracing cores. The RTX 4010 deploys 768 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, with 6 ray tracing cores and 24 tensor cores. The tensor core presence in the RTX 4010 indicates support for AI-accelerated workloads, a feature the 840M lacks entirely.

Both parts support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API-level feature parity exists. The memory architecture, however, is fundamentally different: the 840M shares system memory with no dedicated VRAM, while the RTX 4010 has its own 4 GB GDDR6 pool with a fixed 64-bit bus and 96.00 GB/s bandwidth.

The clock behavior also reflects their different roles. The 840M's 400 MHz base clock is low, but its 2900 MHz boost clock is high, suggesting the integrated part can scale aggressively under load within its 15 W envelope. The RTX 4010's 1417 MHz base and 1762 MHz boost are more conservative, typical of a low-power discrete card that sustains moderate clocks across a 50 W TDP.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon 840M wins in the integrated form factor category. It is an IGP with no slot width, no power connectors, and a 15 W TDP, making it suitable for portable devices where a discrete card cannot fit. Its 4 nm process node is smaller than the RTX 4010's 8 nm node, which suggests better thermal and power efficiency per transistor, though the database provides no direct efficiency measurement. The 840M also has a higher boost clock at 2900 MHz versus 1762 MHz, and it was released later (2025-02-28 versus 2024-04-15). For systems that require zero additional board space and minimal power draw, the 840M is the only viable option of the two.

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4010 wins in every recorded performance metric. Its 2893 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is the only benchmark result in the comparison. It has more shading units (768 versus 256), more TMUs (24 versus 16), more ROPs (16 versus 8), more ray tracing cores (6 versus 4), and 24 tensor cores where the 840M has none. Its pixel rate is higher at 28.19 GPixel/s versus 23.20 GPixel/s, and its FP32 throughput of 2.706 TFLOPS exceeds the 840M's 1,484.8 GFLOPS. The RTX 4010 also offers dedicated 4 GB GDDR6 memory with 96.00 GB/s bandwidth, which is a fixed resource that does not contend with the host system for memory access.

The RTX 4010 wins on connectivity for desktop use, with 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, while the 840M's display outputs depend entirely on the portable device it is integrated into. The RTX 4010 also has a recorded physical footprint of 163 mm by 69 mm, which is small for a discrete card, and it requires no power connectors despite its 50 W TDP.

In terms of production status, both are active products. The RTX 4010 has a clear series lineage (GeForce 40-series, predecessor GeForce 30, successor GeForce 50), while the 840M's series field is null. The RTX 4010 also has a suggested PSU rating of 250 W, giving system integrators a concrete power planning figure; the 840M has no such figure because it draws from the host platform.

The recorded data ultimately splits cleanly: the 840M wins on integration efficiency and process technology, while the RTX 4010 wins on raw compute resources, memory, connectivity, and verified benchmark performance. There is no overlap in their strengths, and the database offers no evidence that the 840M can match the RTX 4010 in any measured workload.