AMD Radeon 840M vs NVIDIA RTX 1000 Mobile Ada Generation Comparison

FAQ

Q: What are the architectural foundations of the AMD Radeon 840M and the NVIDIA RTX 1000 Mobile Ada Generation?

A: The AMD Radeon 840M uses the RDNA 3.5 architecture on a 4 nm TSMC process, built as part of the Krackan Point chip. The NVIDIA RTX 1000 Mobile Ada Generation uses the Ada Lovelace architecture on a 5 nm TSMC process, built on the AD107 chip.

Q: How do the memory subsystems compare between these two GPUs?

A: The AMD Radeon 840M uses system shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth, while the NVIDIA RTX 1000 Mobile Ada Generation has 6 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory on a 96-bit bus, delivering 192.0 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: What is the difference in shading unit count?

A: The AMD Radeon 840M has 256 shading units, while the NVIDIA RTX 1000 Mobile Ada Generation has 2560 shading units, a 10-fold difference in raw shader count.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same DirectX version?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), along with OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: What are the power requirements for each?

A: The AMD Radeon 840M has a 15 W TDP, while the NVIDIA RTX 1000 Mobile Ada Generation has a 35 W TDP. Neither uses power connectors.

Q: When was each GPU released?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 1000 Mobile Ada Generation was released on 2024-02-25, and the AMD Radeon 840M was released on 2025-02-28.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon 840M and NVIDIA RTX 1000 Mobile Ada Generation diverge sharply in their underlying designs. The Radeon 840M is an integrated graphics processor from the Krackan Point chip, using the RDNA 3.5 architecture manufactured on a 4 nm TSMC process. The RTX 1000 Mobile Ada Generation is a discrete-class mobile GPU based on the AD107 chip, using the Ada Lovelace architecture on a 5 nm TSMC process. The process node difference gives AMD a slight manufacturing advantage in lithography, though the NVIDIA part compensates with a far larger and more complex chip.

The transistor counts tell a clear story of scale. The NVIDIA AD107 packs 18,900 million transistors on a 159 mm² die, with a transistor density of 118.9M per mm². The AMD Radeon 840M's transistor count and die size are not recorded in the database, but its role as an IGP within a larger APU means its physical footprint is inherently part of a combined processor package. The NVIDIA chip is a standalone GPU with its own dedicated memory interface, while the Radeon 840M relies entirely on system shared memory, making its bandwidth system dependent rather than fixed.

Compute resources differ by an order of magnitude. The Radeon 840M has 256 shading units, 16 texture mapping units, 8 ROPs, and 4 ray tracing cores, with no tensor cores. The RTX 1000 Mobile Ada Generation has 2560 shading units, 80 TMUs, 48 ROPs, 20 RT cores, and 80 tensor cores. This means the NVIDIA part has 10x the shading units, 5x the TMUs, 6x the ROPs, 5x the RT cores, and a dedicated tensor core array that the AMD part lacks entirely. The tensor cores are significant for AI-accelerated workloads, giving the NVIDIA GPU a hardware advantage in that domain that the Radeon 840M cannot match.

Clock behavior also differs. The AMD Radeon 840M has a base clock of 400 MHz and a boost clock of 2900 MHz, a wide frequency range that allows it to scale up dramatically under load. The NVIDIA RTX 1000 Mobile Ada Generation has a base clock of 1485 MHz and a boost clock of 2025 MHz, a narrower range but a much higher floor. The memory clocks reflect their fundamentally different memory architectures: the Radeon 840M uses system shared memory, while the NVIDIA part runs its GDDR6 at 2000 MHz, 16 Gbps effective.

The power envelope separates them further. The Radeon 840M is rated at 15 W TDP, while the RTX 1000 Mobile Ada Generation is rated at 35 W TDP. Both are listed as IGP slot width with no power connectors, and both use a PCIe 4.0 x8 bus interface. The display outputs for both are portable device dependent, meaning their output capabilities are determined by the host system.

Where Each One Wins

The data indicates that the NVIDIA RTX 1000 Mobile Ada Generation wins in every recorded compute and throughput category. Its FP32 throughput is 10.37 TFLOPS versus 1,484.8 GFLOPS for the AMD Radeon 840M, which is a roughly 7x advantage in raw floating-point performance. The pixel rate favors NVIDIA at 97.20 GPixel/s versus 23.20 GPixel/s, and the texture rate favors NVIDIA at 162.0 GTexel/s versus 46.40 GTexel/s. The 6 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory with 192.0 GB/s bandwidth gives NVIDIA a fixed memory advantage, whereas the Radeon 840M's bandwidth is system dependent and cannot be quantified in the database.

The AMD Radeon 840M's advantages are limited to its lower power draw and its integration into a processor package. At 15 W TDP, it draws less than half the power of the NVIDIA part's 35 W TDP. This makes it suited for compact, power-constrained designs where the GPU is part of the main chip rather than a separate component. The Radeon 840M also has a higher boost clock at 2900 MHz versus 2025 MHz, though this does not translate into a throughput advantage given the massive difference in shader count.

The NVIDIA part's 80 tensor cores and 20 RT cores give it capabilities the Radeon 840M simply does not have at the hardware level. The Radeon 840M has 4 RT cores but no tensor cores, meaning AI workloads that rely on tensor operations would run without dedicated hardware acceleration on the AMD part. The RTX 1000 Mobile Ada Generation's higher transistor count, larger die, and dedicated memory all point to a GPU designed for sustained, demanding workloads, while the Radeon 840M is designed as a capable integrated solution for mainstream tasks.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every measurable specification. The AMD Radeon 840M uses the RDNA 3.5 architecture on a 4 nm process, while the NVIDIA RTX 1000 Mobile Ada Generation uses Ada Lovelace on a 5 nm process. The NVIDIA chip has 18,900 million transistors on a 159 mm² die, while the AMD chip's transistor count and die size are unknown. The base clocks are 400 MHz for AMD and 1485 MHz for NVIDIA, with boost clocks of 2900 MHz and 2025 MHz respectively.

Memory configurations are fundamentally different. The Radeon 840M uses system shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth, while the RTX 1000 Mobile Ada Generation has 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus with 192.0 GB/s bandwidth. The memory clock for NVIDIA is 2000 MHz, 16 Gbps effective, while AMD's memory clock is listed as system shared.

Compute unit counts differ substantially: 256 shading units versus 2560, 16 TMUs versus 80, 8 ROPs versus 48, 4 RT cores versus 20, and null versus 80 tensor cores. The pixel rate is 23.20 GPixel/s for AMD versus 97.20 GPixel/s for NVIDIA, and the texture rate is 46.40 GTexel/s versus 162.0 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 1,484.8 GFLOPS versus 10.37 TFLOPS, with both running FP16 at a 1:1 ratio to FP32.

The TDP is 15 W for AMD and 35 W for NVIDIA. Both use PCIe 4.0 x8, have no power connectors, and are classified as IGP slot width. The release dates are 2025-02-28 for AMD and 2024-02-25 for NVIDIA. The NVIDIA part has a predecessor (Ampere-MW) and a successor (Blackwell-MW), while the AMD part lists Navi II IGP as its predecessor. Both are in active production, and neither has a launch MSRP recorded in the database.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows no direct head-to-head benchmark entries, but the specification-derived throughput numbers provide a clear comparison. The largest single advantage for the NVIDIA RTX 1000 Mobile Ada Generation is in FP32 compute: 10.37 TFLOPS versus 1,484.8 GFLOPS, a difference of roughly 7x in floating-point throughput. This is the most consequential gap, as it affects all general-purpose GPU compute workloads.

The texture rate gap is also decisive. The NVIDIA part delivers 162.0 GTexel/s versus 46.40 GTexel/s, a 3.5x advantage that directly impacts texturing-heavy workloads such as 3D rendering and image processing. The pixel rate follows a similar pattern: 97.20 GPixel/s versus 23.20 GPixel/s, a 4.2x advantage for NVIDIA in fill-rate-bound scenarios.

The memory bandwidth difference is absolute. The RTX 1000 Mobile Ada Generation has a fixed 192.0 GB/s from its 6 GB GDDR6 memory, while the Radeon 840M's bandwidth is system dependent and not quantified. This means the NVIDIA part has a guaranteed memory throughput, whereas the AMD part's memory performance varies with the host system's memory configuration.

The shading unit count is the most extreme divergence: 2560 versus 256, a 10x difference that underlies the FP32 and texture rate gaps. The RT core count is 20 versus 4, a 5x difference in ray tracing hardware. The tensor core count is 80 versus none, meaning AI workloads on the Radeon 840M must rely on shader-based compute rather than dedicated tensor hardware.

The AMD Radeon 840M does hold one advantage in the clock domain: its boost clock of 2900 MHz is 875 MHz higher than NVIDIA's 2025 MHz boost. This higher clock rate does not overcome the compute resource deficit, but it indicates the AMD part can scale its frequency aggressively when power and thermal conditions allow. The Radeon 840M also draws less power at 15 W versus 35 W, a 20 W difference that could be meaningful in thermally constrained mobile chassis.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the NVIDIA RTX 1000 Mobile Ada Generation is the substantially more powerful GPU in every recorded performance metric. It delivers roughly 7x the FP32 throughput, 4.2x the pixel rate, 3.5x the texture rate, and 10x the shading units compared to the AMD Radeon 840M. It also has dedicated memory with fixed bandwidth, tensor cores for AI acceleration, and 5x the ray tracing cores. Any workload that depends on raw compute throughput, texture processing, ray tracing, or AI acceleration will favor the NVIDIA part decisively.

The AMD Radeon 840M is the lower-power option at 15 W TDP, less than half the 35 W TDP of the NVIDIA part. Its higher boost clock of 2900 MHz shows aggressive frequency scaling, and its integration as an IGP means it does not require a separate memory subsystem. For power-constrained designs where the GPU is part of the main processor and absolute performance is secondary, the Radeon 840M's profile fits. Its performance is defined by system-dependent memory bandwidth, which means results will vary across host platforms.

The RTX 1000 Mobile Ada Generation is the choice for users who prioritize compute performance, dedicated memory, and hardware-accelerated AI and ray tracing. The Radeon 840M is the choice for users who prioritize power efficiency and integration. The percentile ranking for both is 50 on the database's all-GPU scale, which places them at the midpoint of the recorded GPU population, but the specification data shows they reach that midpoint through very different means. One is a compact integrated solution with modest throughput, the other is a far larger discrete GPU with an order of magnitude more compute resources.