AMD Radeon 840M vs NVIDIA H800 SXM5 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results for the AMD Radeon 840M and NVIDIA H800 SXM5. Both entries show an average benchmark score of zero and no recorded wins for either side. This absence of measured performance data is itself informative: the two products occupy entirely different segments, and no common workload has been logged for both.

The AMD Radeon 840M is an integrated graphics processor built for mobile systems, while the NVIDIA H800 SXM5 is a server accelerator module. Their performance envelopes are defined by specification rather than by competing in the same test suite. The Radeon 840M delivers 1,484.8 GFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the H800 SXM5 delivers 59.30 TFLOPS, which is roughly 40 times higher. In FP16, the gap widens further: the Radeon 840M sustains 1,484.8 GFLOPS in a 1:1 ratio, whereas the H800 SXM5 reaches 237.2 TFLOPS through a 4:1 ratio, approximately 160 times higher.

Texture throughput shows a similar divide. The Radeon 840M achieves 46.40 GTexel/s from its 16 TMUs, while the H800 SXM5 reaches 926.6 GTexel/s from 528 TMUs. Pixel rates differ less dramatically: 23.20 GPixel/s for the Radeon 840M versus 42.12 GPixel/s for the H800 SXM5, a difference explained by the H800's modest 24 ROPs relative to its massive shader array. The H800 also holds the memory advantage with 80 GB of HBM3 on a 5120-bit bus delivering 3.36 TB/s, compared to the Radeon 840M's system-shared memory with bandwidth described as system dependent.

FAQ

Q: Why does the NVIDIA H800 SXM5 have no DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan API entries?

A: The H800 SXM5 is a server accelerator with no display outputs. Its API support is not listed in the database, which aligns with its role as a compute-focused module rather than a graphics-rendering device. The AMD Radeon 840M, by contrast, supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: What is the memory configuration of each product?

A: The Radeon 840M uses system-shared memory with a bus width and size both listed as system shared, and bandwidth is system dependent. The H800 SXM5 uses 80 GB of HBM3 on a 5120-bit bus with 3.36 TB/s of bandwidth and a memory clock of 1313 MHz, or 5.3 Gbps effective.

Q: How do the two products differ in power requirements?

A: The Radeon 840M has a 15 W TDP, uses no power connectors, and is an IGP with a slot width of IGP. The H800 SXM5 has a 700 W TDP, requires an 8-pin EPS power connector, uses an SXM Module slot width, and suggests a 1100 W power supply.

Q: Which product has more shading units and tensor cores?

A: The H800 SXM5 has 16,896 shading units and 528 tensor cores. The Radeon 840M has 256 shading units, 4 ray tracing cores, and no tensor core entry. The H800 also has 528 TMUs and 24 ROPs, while the Radeon 840M has 16 TMUs and 8 ROPs.

Q: What are the release dates for these products?

A: The AMD Radeon 840M was released on 2025-02-28, and the NVIDIA H800 SXM5 was released on 2023-03-20. Both are listed as active in production status.

Q: Do the two products share the same manufacturing process?

A: Both are fabricated by TSMC, but on different nodes. The Radeon 840M uses a 4 nm process, while the H800 SXM5 uses a 5 nm process. The H800 SXM5 contains 80,000 million transistors on an 814 mm² die, with a transistor density of 98.3M per mm²; the Radeon 840M's transistor count and die size are unknown.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon 840M is built on the RDNA 3.5 architecture, specifically the Krackan Point chip, and belongs to the Navi III IGP generation with a Strix Point Mobile label. It is a 4 nm part from TSMC. The NVIDIA H800 SXM5 uses the Hopper architecture with the GH100 chip, belongs to the Server Hopper generation, and is fabricated on TSMC's 5 nm node. The H800 SXM5's die measures 814 mm² and holds 80,000 million transistors, giving a density of 98.3M per mm². The Radeon 840M's die size and transistor count are not recorded.

The Radeon 840M integrates 4 ray tracing cores, a feature that supports real-time ray-traced graphics workloads. The H800 SXM5 lists no ray tracing core count but includes 528 tensor cores, which are dedicated to matrix math for AI and deep learning. The Radeon 840M has no tensor core entry. The H800's 528 TMUs and 24 ROPs reflect a compute-oriented design that emphasizes texture and tensor throughput over pixel output, while the Radeon 840M's 16 TMUs and 8 ROPs suit its lighter integrated role.

Both products connect through PCIe but on different revisions and widths. The Radeon 840M uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the H800 SXM5 uses PCIe 5.0 x16. The H800 SXM5 has no display outputs, whereas the Radeon 840M's display outputs are listed as portable device dependent, meaning they vary by the laptop or handheld system it is integrated into.

The Radeon 840M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The H800 SXM5 has no API entries in the database, consistent with its lack of display outputs and server orientation. The Radeon 840M's predecessor is Navi II IGP, while the H800 SXM5's predecessor is Server Ada and its successor is Server Blackwell.

Specification Differences

Clock speeds differ substantially. The Radeon 840M has a base clock of 400 MHz and a boost clock of 2900 MHz. The H800 SXM5 has a base clock of 1095 MHz and a boost clock of 1755 MHz. The Radeon 840M's higher boost reflects its mobile efficiency design, while the H800's higher base clock supports sustained server workloads.

Memory differs in every recorded field. The Radeon 840M uses system-shared memory with system-shared type, bus width, and system-dependent bandwidth. The H800 SXM5 uses 80 GB of HBM3 on a 5120-bit bus with 3.36 TB/s bandwidth and a memory clock of 1313 MHz, or 5.3 Gbps effective.

Compute resources: the Radeon 840M has 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, 8 ROPs, and 4 ray tracing cores. The H800 SXM5 has 16,896 shading units, 528 TMUs, 24 ROPs, no ray tracing core count, and 528 tensor cores.

Throughput rates: the Radeon 840M records 23.20 GPixel/s pixel rate, 46.40 GTexel/s texture rate, 1,484.8 GFLOPS FP32, and 1,484.8 GFLOPS FP16 in a 1:1 ratio. The H800 SXM5 records 42.12 GPixel/s pixel rate, 926.6 GTexel/s texture rate, 59.30 TFLOPS FP32, and 237.2 TFLOPS FP16 in a 4:1 ratio.

Power and physical specifications: the Radeon 840M has a 15 W TDP, IGP slot width, no power connectors, and no suggested PSU. The H800 SXM5 has a 700 W TDP, SXM Module slot width, an 8-pin EPS power connector, and a suggested PSU of 1100 W. The Radeon 840M uses PCIe 4.0 x8, the H800 uses PCIe 5.0 x16.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon 840M wins in integration and power efficiency. Its 15 W TDP, IGP slot width, and lack of power connectors make it suitable for portable devices where space and thermal limits are tight. Its boost clock of 2900 MHz is notably higher than the H800's 1755 MHz, and its support for DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 means it can handle graphics rendering APIs directly. The Radeon 840M also includes 4 ray tracing cores, enabling hardware-accelerated ray tracing in compatible workloads. Its system-shared memory approach removes the need for dedicated VRAM, which simplifies system design.

The NVIDIA H800 SXM5 wins in raw compute and memory capacity. Its 59.30 TFLOPS FP32 and 237.2 TFLOPS FP16 performance, combined with 80 GB of HBM3 and 3.36 TB/s bandwidth, position it for large-scale data processing. The 528 tensor cores provide dedicated hardware for matrix operations, which is a capability the Radeon 840M lacks. Its 16,896 shading units and 528 TMUs give it enormous parallel throughput for compute-heavy tasks. The PCIe 5.0 x16 interface provides higher bandwidth to the host system than the Radeon 840M's PCIe 4.0 x8.

The Radeon 840M wins in graphics API coverage and portability. The H800 SXM5 wins in every measure of absolute performance, memory bandwidth, and tensor compute. The Radeon 840M's 1,484.8 GFLOPS FP32 output is a small fraction of the H800's 59.30 TFLOPS, but it consumes 15 W compared to 700 W. The H800's 42.12 GPixel/s pixel rate is roughly double the Radeon's 23.20 GPixel/s, yet the Radeon's 8 ROPs deliver that rate at a fraction of the power.

The H800 SXM5's 3.36 TB/s memory bandwidth is orders of magnitude beyond the Radeon 840M's system-dependent shared memory. The Radeon 840M's 4 ray tracing cores give it a feature the H800 does not list, but the H800's 528 tensor cores address a different workload class entirely.

The Verdict

The data defines two products with no overlap in intended use. The AMD Radeon 840M is an integrated GPU for mobile systems, built on RDNA 3.5 at 4 nm, with a 15 W TDP and system-shared memory. It supports graphics APIs, includes ray tracing cores, and operates within the power and thermal envelope of a portable device. Its performance is modest: 1,484.8 GFLOPS FP32, 46.40 GTexel/s, and 23.20 GPixel/s.

The NVIDIA H800 SXM5 is a server accelerator with a 700 W TDP, 80 GB of HBM3, 528 tensor cores, and 59.30 TFLOPS FP32. It has no display outputs and no recorded graphics API support. Its 3.36 TB/s memory bandwidth and 237.2 TFLOPS FP16 output indicate a design aimed at compute and AI workloads rather than rendering.

Benchmark results show no direct comparisons, and both products hold a 50th percentile ranking among all GPUs in the database, with no average benchmark scores recorded. The choice between them is therefore not a matter of performance hierarchy but of system context. The Radeon 840M is the only option for an integrated, low-power mobile graphics solution with API support. The H800 SXM5 is the only option for a high-bandwidth, high-throughput server compute module with tensor acceleration.

The Radeon 840M's higher boost clock (2900 MHz versus 1755 MHz) and modern process node (4 nm versus 5 nm) do not compensate for the H800's massive lead in shading units, TMUs, memory, and tensor cores. Conversely, the H800's power and cooling requirements make it unsuitable for any mobile application. The release dates confirm the Radeon 840M is the newer product (2025-02-28 versus 2023-03-20), but the H800 SXM5's successor, Server Blackwell, is already recorded, while the Radeon 840M's successor is not yet listed.

For a system builder selecting an integrated GPU for a portable device, the Radeon 840M is the appropriate part. For a server deployment requiring high FP32 or FP16 throughput, large memory capacity, and tensor core acceleration, the H800 SXM5 is the appropriate part. The database shows no scenario where both would be considered for the same socket or workload.