AMD Radeon 840M vs NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation Comparison

The Verdict

The data in this comparison is unambiguous. The NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation occupies the 95th percentile among all GPUs in the database, while the AMD Radeon 840M sits at the 50th percentile. This places the two products at opposite ends of the performance spectrum, with the NVIDIA part delivering workstation-class compute and the AMD part serving as an integrated graphics solution for portable devices.

The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation is the clear choice for any workload that demands substantial compute throughput, professional rendering, or AI acceleration. Its recorded average benchmark score of 117,088 across Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan tests confirms its position among high-end workstation GPUs. The Radeon 840M has no recorded benchmark scores in the database, which means its performance characteristics remain unquantified in direct comparison, but its hardware specifications indicate a fundamentally different performance class.

The AMD Radeon 840M is designed for systems where power efficiency and integration take priority. With a 15 W TDP and an IGP form factor, it targets lightweight portable devices. The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation, with a 70 W TDP and dual-slot footprint, targets compact workstations that require serious compute capability. The choice between these two comes down to whether the system needs integrated simplicity or dedicated performance.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation wins decisively in every measurable compute category recorded in the database. Its FP32 throughput of 19.17 TFLOPS dwarfs the 1,484.8 GFLOPS of the Radeon 840M, a difference of more than an order of magnitude. The NVIDIA part also delivers 99.84 GPixel/s pixel rate and 299.5 GTexel/s texture rate, compared to 23.20 GPixel/s and 46.40 GTexel/s for the AMD part.

The NVIDIA GPU provides 20 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory on a 160-bit bus with 280.0 GB/s bandwidth. The AMD Radeon 840M relies on system shared memory with bandwidth described as system dependent. For memory-intensive workloads such as large dataset processing, high-resolution textures, or AI model inference, the dedicated memory subsystem of the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation provides a substantial advantage.

The Radeon 840M wins in the categories of power consumption and physical footprint. Its 15 W TDP allows operation without external power connectors, and its IGP form factor requires no expansion slot. The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation requires a 250 W suggested PSU despite its 70 W TDP, and it occupies a dual-slot configuration with dimensions of 168 mm in length and 69 mm in height. For ultra-portable devices where space and thermal budget are constrained, the AMD part is the only viable option.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon 840M uses the RDNA 3.5 architecture on TSMC's 4 nm process node, built on the Krackan Point chip. It belongs to the Navi III IGP generation for Strix Point Mobile. The NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation uses the Ada Lovelace architecture on TSMC's 5 nm process node, built on the AD104 chip with 35,800 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 121.8M per mm².

The compute resources differ dramatically. The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation contains 6,144 shading units, 192 texture mapping units, and 64 raster operation pipelines. The Radeon 840M contains 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. These figures represent a 24x difference in shading units and a 12x difference in TMUs, explaining the massive throughput gap.

Ray tracing hardware also differs substantially. The NVIDIA part includes 48 RT cores and 192 tensor cores, while the AMD part includes 4 RT cores and no tensor cores. The tensor core presence gives the NVIDIA GPU dedicated hardware for AI and deep learning workloads, a capability entirely absent from the AMD integrated solution. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Clock speeds show an interesting inversion. The AMD part boosts to 2900 MHz from a 400 MHz base, while the NVIDIA part boosts to 1560 MHz from a 720 MHz base. The higher AMD boost clock cannot compensate for the massive difference in compute unit count. The NVIDIA memory clock runs at 1750 MHz with 14 Gbps effective speed, while the AMD part uses system shared memory.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute throughput?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation delivers 19.17 TFLOPS FP32 performance, which is roughly 12.9 times the 1,484.8 GFLOPS of the AMD Radeon 840M.

Q: Can the AMD Radeon 840M handle ray tracing workloads?

A: The AMD part includes 4 RT cores and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, so it has basic ray tracing capability. However, the NVIDIA part includes 48 RT cores, providing 12 times the dedicated ray tracing hardware.

Q: What memory configurations do these GPUs use?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation uses 20 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory on a 160-bit bus with 280.0 GB/s bandwidth. The AMD Radeon 840M uses system shared memory with bandwidth described as system dependent.

Q: How do their power requirements compare?

A: The AMD Radeon 840M has a 15 W TDP and requires no power connectors. The NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation has a 70 W TDP, requires no power connectors on the card itself, but the suggested PSU rating is 250 W.

Q: Which GPU supports AI acceleration?

A: Only the NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation includes tensor cores, with 192 of them. The AMD Radeon 840M has no tensor core hardware.

Q: How does the NVIDIA part compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation scores 0.3% below the NVIDIA GB10, 1.6% below the AMD Radeon PRO W7700, 2.4% above the NVIDIA Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB, and 2.8% above the NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan results for the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation provide concrete data points. The OpenCL score of 124,812 and Vulkan score of 109,364 produce an average of 117,088. This places the NVIDIA part in the 95th percentile of all GPUs in the database. The AMD Radeon 840M has no recorded benchmark scores, so direct numerical comparison is impossible, but its 50th percentile ranking indicates it sits at the median of all GPUs.

The FP32 throughput comparison delivers the clearest picture. The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation achieves 19.17 TFLOPS, which is 19,170 GFLOPS. The Radeon 840M achieves 1,484.8 GFLOPS. The NVIDIA part delivers approximately 12.9 times the FP32 throughput. In pixel throughput, the NVIDIA part produces 99.84 GPixel/s versus 23.20 GPixel/s for the AMD part, a 4.3x advantage. Texture throughput shows a 6.5x gap at 299.5 GTexel/s versus 46.40 GTexel/s.

Memory bandwidth presents another decisive gap. The NVIDIA part provides 280.0 GB/s of dedicated bandwidth. The AMD part depends on system memory, with bandwidth labeled as system dependent. The 20 GB dedicated frame buffer on the NVIDIA part eliminates any contention with CPU memory traffic, whereas the AMD IGP shares all memory access with the host processor.

The nearest rival data for the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation shows how tightly clustered the top workstation GPUs are. The NVIDIA GB10 scores 117,393, just 0.3% higher. The AMD Radeon PRO W7700 scores 118,976, 1.6% higher. The NVIDIA Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB scores 114,395, 2.4% lower. The NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile scores 113,944, 2.8% lower. These margins indicate that the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation competes directly with flagship workstation accelerators despite its compact form factor.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every specification category in the database. The AMD Radeon 840M uses a 4 nm process node, while the NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation uses 5 nm. Both are fabricated by TSMC. The NVIDIA chip contains 35,800 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, while the AMD chip's transistor count and die size are listed as unknown.

Clock specifications show the AMD part boosting to 2900 MHz from a 400 MHz base. The NVIDIA part boosts to 1560 MHz from a 720 MHz base. Memory clocks differ fundamentally: the AMD part uses system shared memory, while the NVIDIA part runs at 1750 MHz with 14 Gbps effective speed.

Compute unit counts favor NVIDIA overwhelmingly. The RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation has 6,144 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The Radeon 840M has 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. Ray tracing hardware: 48 RT cores for NVIDIA versus 4 for AMD. Tensor cores: 192 for NVIDIA versus none for AMD.

Power and physical specifications diverge completely. The AMD part draws 15 W TDP and exists as an IGP with no slot width. The NVIDIA part draws 70 W TDP, occupies a dual-slot configuration, measures 168 mm in length and 69 mm in height, and suggests a 250 W PSU. Neither requires power connectors on the card.

Bus interface differs: PCIe 4.0 x8 for AMD, PCIe 4.0 x16 for NVIDIA. Display outputs: the AMD part depends on the portable device, while the NVIDIA part provides 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a. API support matches across DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA part belongs to the GeForce 40-series with Ada Lovelace architecture, while the AMD part uses RDNA 3.5 on the Krackan Point chip. Release dates differ by nearly two years, with NVIDIA launching on 2023-03-20 and AMD on 2025-02-28.