AMD Radeon 840M vs NVIDIA N1 16SM Comparison

The Verdict

The database comparison between the AMD Radeon 840M and the NVIDIA N1 16SM shows two integrated graphics processors with fundamentally different design priorities. The Radeon 840M is a low-power, mainstream IGP built for efficiency and broad software compatibility, while the N1 16SM is a high-throughput part with a drastically larger compute footprint and dedicated memory subsystem.

Based strictly on the recorded specifications, the NVIDIA N1 16SM holds a commanding lead in raw performance metrics. Its FP32 throughput of 9.609 TFLOPS is roughly 6.5 times higher than the Radeon 840M's 1,484.8 GFLOPS. The N1 16SM also delivers a pixel rate of 56.30 GPixel/s versus 23.20 GPixel/s, and a texture rate of 300.3 GTexel/s versus 46.40 GTexel/s. For any workload that stresses shading, texturing, or pixel output, the N1 16SM is the clear choice.

However, the Radeon 840M offers something the N1 16SM does not: API support. The Radeon 840M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The N1 16SM lists all three APIs as "N/A". For users running games or applications that require these graphics APIs, the Radeon 840M is the only viable option between the two.

The data indicates that the N1 16SM is for users who prioritize raw compute and memory bandwidth, while the Radeon 840M is for users who need a functional IGP with standard graphics API compatibility. Both are active production parts, but they target different use cases entirely.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA N1 16SM wins decisively in every measurable performance category. Its 2048 shading units dwarf the Radeon 840M's 256, and its 128 texture mapping units are eight times more numerous. The N1 16SM also has 16 ray tracing cores, compared to 4 on the Radeon 840M, and 64 tensor cores, a feature the Radeon 840M does not list at all. The N1 16SM's 24 ROPs triple the Radeon 840M's 8, enabling higher fill rates.

Memory is another major differentiator. The N1 16SM comes with 128 GB of LPDDR5X on a 256-bit bus, delivering 273.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The Radeon 840M uses system-shared memory with bandwidth described as "System Dependent". The N1 16SM's dedicated memory pool removes the variable performance penalty of shared memory architectures.

The Radeon 840M wins in power efficiency, however. Its TDP is listed at 15 W, while the N1 16SM's TDP is unknown. The Radeon 840M also has a higher boost clock relative to its base: 2900 MHz versus 400 MHz, a 7.25x multiplier. The N1 16SM boosts from 741 MHz to 2346 MHz, a 3.17x multiplier. This suggests the Radeon 840M can scale its performance dynamically within a much tighter power envelope.

The Radeon 840M also wins on process node, using a 4 nm TSMC process versus the N1 16SM's 5 nm TSMC process. The smaller node typically allows for better power efficiency at the same clock speed, though the N1 16SM's massive compute array overwhelms this advantage in absolute terms.

Architecture Differences

The two IGPs come from entirely different architectural families. The AMD Radeon 840M uses RDNA 3.5, built on the Krackan Point chip, and belongs to the Navi III IGP generation for Strix Point Mobile. The NVIDIA N1 16SM uses Blackwell 2.0, built on the GB20B chip, and belongs to the Blackwell IGP generation for N1x platforms.

The manufacturing processes differ: the Radeon 840M uses a 4 nm TSMC node, while the N1 16SM uses a 5 nm TSMC node. The N1 16SM's die size is recorded at 382 mm², while the Radeon 840M's die size is unknown. Transistor counts are unknown for both parts.

The compute architectures diverge sharply. The Radeon 840M has 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, 8 ROPs, and 4 ray tracing cores. The N1 16SM has 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, 24 ROPs, 16 ray tracing cores, and 64 tensor cores. The N1 16SM's tensor core count indicates a design aimed at AI and machine learning workloads, a capability absent from the Radeon 840M's specification sheet.

Clock behavior also differs. The Radeon 840M has a base clock of 400 MHz and a boost of 2900 MHz. The N1 16SM has a base of 741 MHz and a boost of 2346 MHz. Despite the N1 16SM's lower boost clock, its much larger shader array produces far higher aggregate throughput.

Memory architecture is a fundamental split. The Radeon 840M uses system-shared memory with a system-dependent bus width and bandwidth. The N1 16SM has 128 GB of LPDDR5X on a 256-bit bus with a fixed 273.2 GB/s bandwidth. The N1 16SM also lists a memory clock of 1067 MHz with 8.5 Gbps effective, while the Radeon 840M's memory clock is marked "System Shared".

The bus interfaces differ: the Radeon 840M uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the N1 16SM uses PCIe 5.0 x16. The N1 16SM's wider and faster bus doubles both the lane count and the protocol generation.

API support is another major architectural distinction. The Radeon 840M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The N1 16SM lists all three as "N/A", meaning the database records no compatible graphics APIs for this part.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA N1 16SM delivers 9.609 TFLOPS FP32, compared to the AMD Radeon 840M's 1,484.8 GFLOPS. The N1 16SM also has 2048 shading units versus 256.

Q: Does the NVIDIA N1 16SM support DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan?

A: No. The database lists all three APIs as "N/A" for the N1 16SM. The AMD Radeon 840M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: What memory does each GPU use?

A: The NVIDIA N1 16SM uses 128 GB of LPDDR5X on a 256-bit bus with 273.2 GB/s bandwidth. The AMD Radeon 840M uses system-shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has more ray tracing cores?

A: The NVIDIA N1 16SM has 16 ray tracing cores. The AMD Radeon 840M has 4 ray tracing cores.

Q: What is the process node for each chip?

A: The AMD Radeon 840M uses a 4 nm TSMC process. The NVIDIA N1 16SM uses a 5 nm TSMC process.

Q: What is the power consumption of each IGP?

A: The AMD Radeon 840M has a TDP of 15 W. The NVIDIA N1 16SM's TDP is listed as unknown.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records no direct head-to-head benchmark scores for these two parts, so the comparison relies on the recorded specification-derived throughput metrics.

The largest win for the NVIDIA N1 16SM is in FP32 compute. The N1 16SM outputs 9.609 TFLOPS, which is 6.47 times the Radeon 840M's 1,484.8 GFLOPS. This is the single biggest gap between the two parts.

Texture throughput shows a similar disparity. The N1 16SM's texture rate is 300.3 GTexel/s, versus 46.40 GTexel/s for the Radeon 840M, a factor of 6.47. The N1 16SM's 128 TMUs versus 16 TMUs explains this ratio directly.

Pixel throughput favors the N1 16SM as well, at 56.30 GPixel/s versus 23.20 GPixel/s. That is a 2.43x advantage, smaller than the compute and texture gaps because the Radeon 840M's higher boost clock (2900 MHz versus 2346 MHz) partially compensates for its fewer ROPs (8 versus 24).

Memory bandwidth is another decisive N1 16SM win. Its 273.2 GB/s is fixed, while the Radeon 840M's bandwidth is "System Dependent". In any system where shared memory bandwidth is limited, the N1 16SM's dedicated LPDDR5X pool provides a guaranteed performance floor.

The Radeon 840M's wins are limited to API compatibility and power. Its DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 support are absent from the N1 16SM's record. Its 15 W TDP is known, while the N1 16SM's TDP is unknown, preventing a direct power comparison.

Clock speed is one area where the Radeon 840M shows an advantage. Its boost clock of 2900 MHz exceeds the N1 16SM's 2346 MHz by 554 MHz. Its base clock of 400 MHz is lower than the N1 16SM's 741 MHz, but the Radeon 840M's wider boost range indicates a design that ramps aggressively under load.

The N1 16SM also wins on memory capacity. Its 128 GB of LPDDR5X is a fixed allocation, while the Radeon 840M relies on system-shared memory with no guaranteed capacity. For workloads that require large working sets, the N1 16SM's dedicated memory is a substantial advantage.

Specification Differences

The two IGPs differ across nearly every recorded field. The following are the key distinctions:

Architecture and Chip:

• AMD Radeon 840M: RDNA 3.5, Krackan Point chip, Navi III IGP generation
• NVIDIA N1 16SM: Blackwell 2.0, GB20B chip, Blackwell IGP generation

Process Node:

• AMD Radeon 840M: 4 nm TSMC
• NVIDIA N1 16SM: 5 nm TSMC

Die Size:

• AMD Radeon 840M: Unknown
• NVIDIA N1 16SM: 382 mm²

Clocks:

• AMD Radeon 840M: Base 400 MHz, boost 2900 MHz
• NVIDIA N1 16SM: Base 741 MHz, boost 2346 MHz

Memory:

• AMD Radeon 840M: System shared, size and type system shared, bandwidth system dependent
• NVIDIA N1 16SM: 128 GB LPDDR5X, 256-bit bus, 273.2 GB/s bandwidth, 1067 MHz (8.5 Gbps effective)

Shading Units:

• AMD Radeon 840M: 256
• NVIDIA N1 16SM: 2048

TMUs:

• AMD Radeon 840M: 16
• NVIDIA N1 16SM: 128

ROPs:

• AMD Radeon 840M: 8
• NVIDIA N1 16SM: 24

Ray Tracing Cores:

• AMD Radeon 840M: 4
• NVIDIA N1 16SM: 16

Tensor Cores:

• AMD Radeon 840M: Not listed
• NVIDIA N1 16SM: 64

Pixel Rate:

• AMD Radeon 840M: 23.20 GPixel/s
• NVIDIA N1 16SM: 56.30 GPixel/s

Texture Rate:

• AMD Radeon 840M: 46.40 GTexel/s
• NVIDIA N1 16SM: 300.3 GTexel/s

FP32:

• AMD Radeon 840M: 1,484.8 GFLOPS
• NVIDIA N1 16SM: 9.609 TFLOPS

FP16:

• AMD Radeon 840M: 1,484.8 GFLOPS (1:1)
• NVIDIA N1 16SM: 9.609 TFLOPS (1:1)

TDP:

• AMD Radeon 840M: 15 W
• NVIDIA N1 16SM: Unknown

Bus Interface:

• AMD Radeon 840M: PCIe 4.0 x8
• NVIDIA N1 16SM: PCIe 5.0 x16

Display Outputs:

• AMD Radeon 840M: Portable device dependent
• NVIDIA N1 16SM: 1x HDMI

API Support:

• AMD Radeon 840M: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.4
• NVIDIA N1 16SM: All listed as N/A

Release Date:

• AMD Radeon 840M: 2025-02-28
• NVIDIA N1 16SM: 2026-05-31

Predecessor:

• AMD Radeon 840M: Navi II IGP
• NVIDIA N1 16SM: None listed

Both parts are marked as Active in production status, both are IGPs with no power connectors, and both have no launch MSRP recorded. The N1 16SM's much larger shader count, dedicated memory, and tensor cores make it the performance leader, while the Radeon 840M's API support and known 15 W TDP define its role as a compatible, low-power alternative.