AMD Radeon 840M vs NVIDIA RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no recorded head-to-head benchmark scores for the AMD Radeon 840M and the NVIDIA RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation. Both entries show zero wins in direct comparisons, zero benchmark entries, and an average benchmark score of zero. This absence of measured data means the two GPUs cannot be ranked against each other using empirical performance results from the database.

What the recorded data does show is the theoretical compute ceiling for each part. The NVIDIA RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation delivers 15.62 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput, while the AMD Radeon 840M reaches 1,484.8 GFLOPS (approximately 1.48 TFLOPS). The NVIDIA part offers roughly 10.5 times the raw FP32 compute on paper. Pixel fill rates follow a similar pattern: the RTX 3000 Mobile Ada hits 81.36 GPixel/s versus 23.20 GPixel/s for the Radeon 840M, a 3.5x advantage. Texture rate shows the largest gap, with 244.1 GTexel/s on the NVIDIA side versus 46.40 GTexel/s on the AMD side, a 5.3x difference.

These figures come from the specification tables, not from executed workloads. The database does not include any application-level benchmarks, game tests, or synthetic suites for either product. As a result, any statement about real-world performance must remain qualitative and tied strictly to the architectural parameters listed.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different manufacturers, different foundries, and different design philosophies. AMD builds the Radeon 840M on TSMC's 4 nm process using the RDNA 3.5 architecture, with the chip designated Krackan Point. This is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) belonging to the Navi III IGP generation for Strix Point Mobile. NVIDIA's RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation uses the AD106 chip on TSMC's 5 nm process, built on the Ada Lovelace architecture and classified under the Ada-MW generation. The process node difference is small (4 nm versus 5 nm), but the transistor budgets are not comparable, as AMD lists its transistor count as unknown while NVIDIA specifies 22,900 million transistors on a 188 mm² die, yielding a density of 121.8M transistors per mm².

Compute resources diverge sharply. The Radeon 840M contains 256 shading units, 16 texture mapping units, 8 ROPs, and 4 ray tracing cores. It has no tensor cores listed. The RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation packs 4,608 shading units, 144 TMUs, 48 ROPs, 36 ray tracing cores, and 144 tensor cores. The NVIDIA part has 18 times the shading units, 9 times the TMUs, 6 times the ROPs, and 9 times the ray tracing cores.

Clock behavior also differs. The AMD part runs at a 400 MHz base clock and boosts to 2900 MHz, a 7.25x multiplier between base and boost. NVIDIA's part starts at 1395 MHz base and boosts to 1695 MHz, a much narrower 1.2x range. The Radeon 840M's higher boost clock partially compensates for its smaller shader array, but the sheer difference in execution units remains decisive on paper.

Memory architecture separates the two fundamentally. The AMD Radeon 840M uses system shared memory for everything: capacity, type, bus width, and bandwidth are all listed as "System Shared" or "System Dependent". This means the GPU borrows from the host's main memory pool, with no dedicated VRAM. The NVIDIA RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation uses 8 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The memory clock is 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective transfer rate. The NVIDIA part also runs on a PCIe 4.0 x16 interface, while the AMD part uses PCIe 4.0 x8.

Power envelopes differ by a factor of nearly 8. The Radeon 840M carries a TDP of 15 W. The RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation carries a TDP of 115 W. Both are classified as IGP slot width with no power connectors, and both rely on portable device dependent display outputs. The NVIDIA part consumes substantially more power, which aligns with its much larger compute and memory resources.

Both GPUs support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA part has a successor listed (Blackwell-MW) and a predecessor (Ampere-MW). The AMD part lists its predecessor as Navi II IGP and has no successor. Release dates differ by almost two years: the NVIDIA part launched on March 20, 2023, while the AMD part launched on February 28, 2025.

Where Each One Wins

Without benchmark results, the analysis must rely on architectural characteristics. The AMD Radeon 840M wins in efficiency-oriented scenarios. Its 15 W TDP fits into thin-and-light portable devices where thermal headroom is minimal. The 4 nm process node gives it a manufacturing advantage over the 5 nm NVIDIA part, and the 400 MHz base clock with 2900 MHz boost suggests the ability to scale up when power and cooling allow. For tasks that do not demand dedicated VRAM, the system shared memory approach reduces component count and board complexity. The absence of power connectors and the IGP form factor make it suitable for mainstream laptops where a separate GPU would not fit.

The NVIDIA RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation wins in compute-heavy and graphics-intensive workloads. The 8 GB GDDR6 frame buffer with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth provides dedicated memory that does not contend with the CPU for system RAM. The 36 ray tracing cores and 144 tensor cores give it hardware acceleration for ray-traced rendering and AI inference, features the AMD part lacks entirely in tensor form. The 4608 shading units and 15.62 TFLOPS FP32 throughput position it for high-resolution gaming, 3D rendering, and machine learning tasks. The 128-bit bus width, while modest, is paired with a 1695 MHz boost clock that sustains compute load better than the AMD part's higher but potentially burst-limited boost.

The AMD part's PCIe 4.0 x8 interface halves the available bus lanes compared to the NVIDIA part's PCIe 4.0 x16. For integrated graphics that share memory with the system, this may matter less, as the bottleneck is memory bandwidth rather than bus throughput. For the NVIDIA part, the x16 interface matches its dedicated VRAM and allows higher data transfer rates to the host.

Neither part shows a release date advantage in the database: the AMD part is newer by about 23 months, which could imply newer architecture refinements in RDNA 3.5, but the NVIDIA Ada Lovelace architecture has a mature software ecosystem and a listed successor, indicating an established product line.

The Verdict

The recorded data points to two different product categories. The AMD Radeon 840M is an integrated GPU designed for power-constrained portable systems. Its 15 W TDP, system shared memory, and lack of dedicated VRAM indicate a solution for everyday computing, light graphics, and basic multimedia. The NVIDIA RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation is a discrete-class mobile GPU with 115 W TDP, 8 GB dedicated GDDR6, and a full complement of ray tracing and tensor cores. It targets workloads that require sustained graphics compute, large memory pools, or hardware-accelerated AI.

For users who need a discrete GPU's memory bandwidth and compute resources, the RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation is the only viable option from this data. The 256.0 GB/s bandwidth versus system dependent memory is a categorical difference, not a marginal one. The 15.62 TFLOPS FP32 versus 1,484.8 GFLOPS is a 10.5x gap that no clock speed or architecture tweak can bridge. The 36 ray tracing cores and 144 tensor cores provide capabilities the AMD part cannot match at all.

For users who prioritize battery life, portability, and minimal heat output, the Radeon 840M fits a niche the NVIDIA part cannot serve. A 115 W TDP GPU requires substantial cooling and power delivery, which rules out ultra-thin designs. The 15 W TDP of the AMD part allows for passive or low-noise cooling in compact chassis. Its 4 nm process and 2900 MHz boost clock indicate that AMD has optimized for performance per watt, even though the absolute performance ceiling is far lower.

The database records both parts at the 50th percentile among all GPUs, though this percentile is based on the current dataset and does not reflect head-to-head comparisons. The absence of benchmark scores means no empirical validation of either part's real-world behavior exists in the database. Buyers should treat all performance claims as theoretical until measured data appears.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation has 4,608 shading units, while the AMD Radeon 840M has 256.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon 840M have dedicated video memory?

A: No. Its memory size, type, bus width, and bandwidth are all listed as "System Shared" or "System Dependent", meaning it relies on the host system's main memory.

Q: What is the power consumption difference between the two?

A: The AMD Radeon 840M has a TDP of 15 W, while the NVIDIA RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation has a TDP of 115 W.

Q: Which GPU supports ray tracing cores?

A: Both GPUs list ray tracing cores, but with different counts. The AMD Radeon 840M has 4 RT cores, and the NVIDIA RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation has 36 RT cores.

Q: What memory bandwidth does the NVIDIA RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation provide?

A: It provides 256.0 GB/s through 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus.

Q: Which GPU has tensor cores?

A: Only the NVIDIA RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation lists tensor cores, with 144 of them. The AMD Radeon 840M has no tensor cores listed.

Q: What is the FP32 compute output for each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon 840M delivers 1,484.8 GFLOPS, and the NVIDIA RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation delivers 15.62 TFLOPS.

Q: What process nodes do the two GPUs use?

A: The AMD Radeon 840M uses TSMC's 4 nm process, and the NVIDIA RTX 3000 Mobile Ada Generation uses TSMC's 5 nm process.