AMD Radeon 840M vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 SUPER Comparison

AMD Radeon 840M and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 SUPER occupy opposite extremes of the GPU spectrum. The 840M is an integrated processor graphics solution built for low-power mobile devices, while the RTX 5080 SUPER is a discrete add-in board designed for maximum throughput. The database records that the RTX 5080 SUPER has a single benchmark score of 3075 in the 3DMark Steel Nomad DirectX 12 test, placing it at the 19th percentile of all GPUs. The Radeon 840M has no recorded benchmark scores and no nearest rivals listed, while the RTX 5080 SUPER has four comparable entries from the database, showing a narrow competitive window around its score.

FAQ

Q: Does the AMD Radeon 840M have any recorded benchmark scores?

A: No, the database lists no benchmarks for the Radeon 840M. Its average benchmark score is zero and it has a percentile ranking of 50 among all GPUs.

Q: What is the RTX 5080 SUPER's benchmark result?

A: The RTX 5080 SUPER scored 3075 in the 3DMark Steel Nomad DirectX 12 test, with an average benchmark score of 3075 across all recorded tests.

Q: How does the RTX 5080 SUPER compare to its closest rival, the NVIDIA Quadro P1000?

A: The Quadro P1000 has an average score of 3163, which is 2.8% higher than the RTX 5080 SUPER's 3075. The data indicates the RTX 5080 SUPER trails that rival by 2.8%.

Q: Which rival does the RTX 5080 SUPER outperform?

A: The RTX 5080 SUPER leads the NVIDIA GeForce 820A (2983 average score, 3.1% lower) and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 860M (2967 average score, 3.6% lower). It also trails the Intel Arc Pro B60, which averaged 3182, a 3.4% advantage over the RTX 5080 SUPER.

Q: What are the memory configurations for these two processors?

A: The Radeon 840M uses system shared memory with a system dependent bandwidth. The RTX 5080 SUPER has 24 GB of dedicated GDDR7 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 1.02 TB/s of bandwidth.

Q: Which product has the higher transistor count?

A: The RTX 5080 SUPER contains 45,600 million transistors on a 378 mm² die, giving a density of 120.6 million transistors per square millimeter. The transistor count and die size for the Radeon 840M are listed as unknown.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two is substantial. The Radeon 840M is built on AMD's RDNA 3.5 architecture, specifically the Krackan Point chip, and belongs to the Navi III IGP generation for Strix Point mobile platforms. It uses a 4 nm process at TSMC. The RTX 5080 SUPER uses NVIDIA's Blackwell 2.0 architecture, built around the GB203 chip, and is part of the GeForce 50 series. It is fabricated on a 5 nm process, also at TSMC.

The compute resources differ by orders of magnitude. The Radeon 840M has 256 shading units, 16 texture mapping units, and 8 raster output units. It also includes 4 ray tracing cores. The RTX 5080 SUPER has 10,752 shading units, 336 texture mapping units, and 112 raster output units. It has 84 ray tracing cores and 336 tensor cores, while the 840M has no tensor cores listed. That tensor core disparity is critical, as it means the NVIDIA part has dedicated hardware for AI workloads that the AMD IGP completely lacks.

Clock behavior also separates them. The Radeon 840M runs at a 400 MHz base clock and boosts to 2900 MHz. The RTX 5080 SUPER has a base clock of 2295 MHz and a boost of 2617 MHz. The AMD part boosts much higher relative to its base, but the NVIDIA part starts at a far higher floor. The RTX 5080 SUPER's memory clock is 2000 MHz with 32 Gbps effective speed, while the 840M's memory clock is listed as system shared.

The memory subsystems are entirely different classes. The Radeon 840M shares system memory, with no fixed capacity, bus width, or bandwidth, as all are system dependent. The RTX 5080 SUPER has 24 GB of GDDR7 on a 256-bit interface, achieving 1.02 TB/s. This is a dedicated, high-bandwidth arrangement versus a shared, variable one.

The interface and power delivery also differ. The 840M is an IGP with no slot width, no power connectors, and a 15 W TDP. It connects over PCIe 4.0 x8. The RTX 5080 SUPER is a dual-slot card, requires a single 16-pin power connector, and has a 415 W TDP. It uses PCIe 5.0 x16, offering double the lanes and a newer revision.

Where Each One Wins

The Radeon 840M wins on power efficiency and integration. Its 15 W TDP is the only power figure in the database for either product, and that low envelope makes it suitable for compact, battery-powered devices. It has no power connectors, reinforcing its role as a component soldered to a motherboard rather than a standalone card. Its 400 MHz base clock and 2900 MHz boost suggest a design that scales up under load but idles low. The 840M also carries DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 API support, matching the RTX 5080 SUPER on API compatibility. Its 4 nm process is a smaller node than the 5 nm used by the RTX 5080 SUPER, which could imply better transistor efficiency per area, though no transistor data exists for the 840M to confirm that.

The RTX 5080 SUPER wins on raw performance and feature set. Its 56.28 TFLOPS of FP32 compute dwarfs the 840M's 1,484.8 GFLOPS. The texture rate of 879.3 GTexel/s versus 46.40 GTexel/s shows a 19-fold gap. The pixel rate of 293.1 GPixel/s versus 23.20 GPixel/s is over 12 times higher. The RTX 5080 SUPER has 84 ray tracing cores, a dedicated tensor core array with 336 units, and 24 GB of dedicated memory. The 840M has only 4 ray tracing cores and no tensor cores. For any workload involving ray tracing, AI inference, or large datasets, the RTX 5080 SUPER is the only option between the two.

The RTX 5080 SUPER also wins on memory bandwidth. At 1.02 TB/s, it has a fixed, enormous pipeline for data movement. The 840M's bandwidth is system dependent, meaning it could be lower or higher depending on the host platform, but it cannot match a dedicated 256-bit GDDR7 interface. The PCIe 5.0 x16 connection on the RTX 5080 SUPER also provides a wider, faster path to the CPU than the 840M's PCIe 4.0 x8.

Specification Differences

The two products differ on nearly every measurable specification. The process node differs: 4 nm for the Radeon 840M, 5 nm for the RTX 5080 SUPER. The transistor count is unknown for the 840M but 45,600 million for the RTX 5080 SUPER. Die size is unknown for the 840M but 378 mm² for the RTX 5080 SUPER, with a transistor density of 120.6 million per mm² for the latter.

Base clocks differ: 400 MHz versus 2295 MHz. Boost clocks differ: 2900 MHz versus 2617 MHz. The memory clock for the 840M is system shared, while the RTX 5080 SUPER runs at 2000 MHz with 32 Gbps effective speed. Memory size is system shared versus 24 GB. Memory type is system shared versus GDDR7. Bus width is system shared versus 256 bit. Bandwidth is system dependent versus 1.02 TB/s.

Shading units: 256 versus 10,752. Texture mapping units: 16 versus 336. Raster output units: 8 versus 112. Ray tracing cores: 4 versus 84. Tensor cores: none listed versus 336. Pixel rate: 23.20 GPixel/s versus 293.1 GPixel/s. Texture rate: 46.40 GTexel/s versus 879.3 GTexel/s. FP32: 1,484.8 GFLOPS versus 56.28 TFLOPS. FP16: 1,484.8 GFLOPS (1:1) versus 56.28 TFLOPS (1:1). TDP: 15 W versus 415 W. Slot width: IGP versus dual-slot. Power connectors: none versus 1x 16-pin. Bus interface: PCIe 4.0 x8 versus PCIe 5.0 x16. Display outputs: portable device dependent versus 1x HDMI 2.1b and 3x DisplayPort 2.1b. Dimensions: none listed versus 304 mm length, 137 mm height, 40 mm width.

Release dates differ: the Radeon 840M launched on 2025-02-28, while the RTX 5080 SUPER launched on 2025-12-31. The RTX 5080 SUPER has a launch MSRP of 999 USD, which is the only price figure in the database. The 840M has no launch MSRP listed.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark comparisons between the Radeon 840M and the RTX 5080 SUPER. The wins counter shows zero for each product. The only benchmark data available is the RTX 5080 SUPER's single 3DMark Steel Nomad DirectX 12 score of 3075. The Radeon 840M has no scores at all, so any direct numerical comparison must rely on the RTX 5080 SUPER's rival set.

The RTX 5080 SUPER's nearest rivals frame its performance. The NVIDIA Quadro P1000 leads it with an average score of 3163, a 2.8% gap. The Intel Arc Pro B60 scores 3182, which is 3.4% higher than the RTX 5080 SUPER. On the other side, the NVIDIA GeForce 820A averages 2983, which is 3.1% lower, and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 860M averages 2967, which is 3.6% lower. This places the RTX 5080 SUPER in a tight band between 2967 and 3182, only a few percentage points away from each competitor.

The compute specifications reinforce the performance gap. The RTX 5080 SUPER's FP32 throughput of 56.28 TFLOPS is roughly 38 times higher than the 840M's 1,484.8 GFLOPS. Its texture rate of 879.3 GTexel/s is about 19 times higher. Its pixel rate of 293.1 GPixel/s is about 12.6 times higher. The 840M's boost clock of 2900 MHz is higher than the RTX 5080 SUPER's 2617 MHz, but clock speed alone cannot compensate for the massive difference in execution resources. The 840M has 256 shading units versus 10,752, a 42-fold difference. It has 16 TMUs versus 336, a 21-fold difference. It has 8 ROPs versus 112, a 14-fold difference.

Ray tracing and tensor performance follow the same trend. The 840M's 4 ray tracing cores are a token presence, while the RTX 5080 SUPER has 84. The RTX 5080 SUPER's 336 tensor cores have no equivalent in the 840M, which lists none. For workloads that use tensor operations, the RTX 5080 SUPER has dedicated hardware and the 840M has none.

Memory bandwidth is another clear separator. The RTX 5080 SUPER's 1.02 TB/s is a fixed, high-speed pipeline. The 840M's bandwidth is system dependent, so it shares the same memory bus as the CPU and system RAM. That shared arrangement typically results in lower effective bandwidth for graphics workloads compared to dedicated VRAM. The 840M also has no fixed memory capacity, while the RTX 5080 SUPER has 24 GB.

The Verdict

The recorded data leaves little ambiguity. The RTX 5080 SUPER is the clear performance winner, with a benchmark score that places it in the 19th percentile of all GPUs, a 56.28 TFLOPS FP32 rate, 84 ray tracing cores, 336 tensor cores, and 24 GB of dedicated GDDR7 memory at 1.02 TB/s. It is a dual-slot card with a 415 W TDP, a 16-pin power connector, and PCIe 5.0 x16 interface. Its nearest rivals in the database, such as the Quadro P1000 and Arc Pro B60, sit within 3.4% of its score, meaning it competes in a narrow performance band. The RTX 5080 SUPER also carries a launch MSRP of 999 USD, the only price figure available.

The Radeon 840M is the choice for low-power, integrated scenarios. Its 15 W TDP, lack of power connectors, and IGP slot width indicate a design for portable devices where space and cooling are limited. It has no benchmark scores, no nearest rivals, and no dedicated memory, relying instead on system shared resources. Its 4 nm process node is smaller than the RTX 5080 SUPER's 5 nm, and its 2900 MHz boost clock is higher, but those advantages do not translate into competitive compute rates. The 840M has 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, 8 ROPs, and 4 ray tracing cores, which are entry-level figures.

The API support is identical, with both products listing DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. That means software compatibility is not a differentiator. The display outputs differ, with the 840M being portable device dependent and the RTX 5080 SUPER offering 1x HDMI 2.1b and 3x DisplayPort 2.1b.

The production status for both is active, and both were released in 2025, with the 840M arriving earlier in the year and the RTX 5080 SUPER at the end. The RTX 5080 SUPER has a known transistor count of 45,600 million on a 378 mm² die, while the 840M's transistor count and die size are unknown.

For any user seeking maximum graphics throughput, ray tracing, AI acceleration, or high-bandwidth memory, the RTX 5080 SUPER is the only option in this comparison. For a device that must operate within a 15 W power envelope, use no external power connectors, and fit into an integrated form factor, the Radeon 840M is the only option. The data does not support any middle ground, as the two products do not overlap in performance class, memory architecture, or power requirements. The RTX 5080 SUPER's single benchmark score and rival set confirm its mid-pack standing among the four listed competitors, while the 840M's lack of scores leaves its performance unmeasured in this database. The verdict is straightforward: choose the RTX 5080 SUPER for dedicated, high-performance workloads, and choose the Radeon 840M for ultra-low-power integrated graphics with no performance expectations beyond basic functionality.