AMD Radeon 840M vs NVIDIA RTX 5000 Embedded Ada Generation X2 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon 840M is an integrated graphics processor built for portable devices, with a 15 W TDP and a boost clock of 2900 MHz. Its design targets low-power systems where space and thermal limits dominate. The NVIDIA RTX 5000 Embedded Ada Generation X2, by contrast, is a discrete-class embedded GPU with a 150 W TDP and a boost clock of 1680 MHz. The data shows that each part wins in entirely different operational envelopes: the Radeon 840M wins on power efficiency and compact integration, while the RTX 5000 Embedded Ada Generation X2 wins on raw throughput, memory bandwidth, and feature density.

The Radeon 840M uses system-shared memory, meaning its bandwidth and capacity are dependent on the host platform. This makes it a flexible option for thin-and-light systems where dedicated VRAM is not feasible. The RTX 5000 Embedded Ada Generation X2 carries 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 576.0 GB/s of bandwidth. That memory subsystem alone places the NVIDIA part in a different performance class for memory-bound workloads.

In terms of raw compute, the RTX 5000 Embedded Ada Generation X2 offers 32.69 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, whereas the Radeon 840M offers 1,484.8 GFLOPS. The NVIDIA part is roughly 22 times faster in FP32 throughput, a gap that dominates any multi-core or GPU-compute comparison. The Radeon 840M counters with a much lower power draw, making it the only realistic choice for battery-powered, fanless, or passively cooled designs.

The RTX 5000 Embedded Ada Generation X2 also leads in pixel and texture throughput: 188.2 GPixel/s versus 23.20 GPixel/s, and 510.7 GTexel/s versus 46.40 GTexel/s. These figures indicate that the NVIDIA part is designed for high-resolution rendering and heavy texture filtering, while the AMD part is suited to light 2D acceleration and basic 3D tasks.

Neither part has recorded benchmark scores in the database, and both sit at the 50th percentile against all GPUs. The head-to-head benchmark array is empty, so the win split is zero for both sides. The analysis below therefore relies on architectural and specification differences rather than measured performance deltas.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations and process nodes. The AMD Radeon 840M uses RDNA 3.5 architecture on a 4 nm TSMC process, with the chip codenamed Krackan Point. It belongs to the Navi III IGP generation for Strix Point Mobile. The NVIDIA RTX 5000 Embedded Ada Generation X2 uses Ada Lovelace architecture on a 5 nm TSMC process, built around the AD103 chip and belonging to the Ada-MW generation. The process node difference is small, but the architectural goals diverge sharply.

The Radeon 840M integrates 256 shading units, 16 texture mapping units, 8 ROPs, and 4 RT cores. It has no dedicated tensor cores. The RTX 5000 Embedded Ada Generation X2 packs 9,728 shading units, 304 TMUs, 112 ROPs, 76 RT cores, and 304 tensor cores. The NVIDIA part therefore provides hardware acceleration for both ray tracing and tensor operations, while the AMD part only offers ray tracing support through its 4 RT cores.

Transistor counts reinforce the scale gap. The RTX 5000 Embedded Ada Generation X2 contains 45,900 million transistors on a 379 mm² die, with a transistor density of 121.1M per mm². The Radeon 840M's transistor count and die size are listed as unknown in the database. The NVIDIA chip's large die and high transistor budget enable its massive shading unit count and dedicated tensor core array.

Both parts support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The API feature sets are identical, which means software compatibility is not a differentiator. The Radeon 840M uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface, while the RTX 5000 Embedded Ada Generation X2 uses PCIe 4.0 x16. The wider interface on the NVIDIA part provides more host bandwidth, which matters for data transfer in compute workloads.

The Radeon 840M's memory clock is listed as "System Shared" with bandwidth described as "System Dependent." The RTX 5000 Embedded Ada Generation X2 runs its memory at 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective, delivering 576.0 GB/s. This is a fundamental architectural difference: one relies on shared system memory, the other has a dedicated, high-speed GDDR6 pool.

The release dates differ by nearly two years. The NVIDIA part launched on 2023-03-20, while the AMD part launched on 2025-02-28. The NVIDIA part's predecessor is Ampere-MW and its successor is Blackwell-MW. The AMD part's predecessor is Navi II IGP, and it has no successor listed.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no recorded head-to-head benchmarks between these two GPUs. The headToHeadBenchmarks array is empty, and both winsA and winsB are zero. Without measured scores, the comparison must rely on the specification-derived metrics that are present in the database.

The largest single difference is FP32 compute. The RTX 5000 Embedded Ada Generation X2 delivers 32.69 TFLOPS, while the Radeon 840M delivers 1,484.8 GFLOPS. Converting the AMD figure to TFLOPS gives approximately 1.48 TFLOPS, which makes the NVIDIA part about 22 times higher. For any FP32-heavy workload, such as scientific simulation, rendering, or machine learning inference, this gap is decisive.

Memory bandwidth shows a similarly stark contrast. The RTX 5000 Embedded Ada Generation X2 provides 576.0 GB/s over a 256-bit bus. The Radeon 840M's bandwidth is "System Dependent," so no fixed number exists, but it will be limited by the host platform's shared memory implementation. In practice, dedicated GDDR6 at 576.0 GB/s outperforms any system-shared configuration.

Pixel rate favors the NVIDIA part at 188.2 GPixel/s versus 23.20 GPixel/s, an approximately 8.1 times difference. Texture rate favors NVIDIA at 510.7 GTexel/s versus 46.40 GTexel/s, an approximately 11 times difference. These ratios indicate that the NVIDIA part is built for high-fill-rate scenarios, while the AMD part is constrained by its low ROP and TMU counts.

Clock speeds tell a more nuanced story. The Radeon 840M has a higher boost clock at 2900 MHz versus 1680 MHz for the NVIDIA part. The AMD part also has a lower base clock at 400 MHz versus 930 MHz. The higher boost clock on the AMD part reflects its small, power-efficient design, but it cannot compensate for the NVIDIA part's 38 times more shading units.

The RTX 5000 Embedded Ada Generation X2 has 76 RT cores versus 4 on the Radeon 840M. It also has 304 tensor cores, while the AMD part has none. For ray-traced rendering and AI-accelerated workloads, the NVIDIA part is the only one with dedicated hardware support for both.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two parts:

• Architecture: RDNA 3.5 versus Ada Lovelace
• Process node: 4 nm versus 5 nm
• Chip: Krackan Point versus AD103
• Generation: Navi III IGP (Strix Point Mobile) versus Ada-MW
• Transistors: unknown versus 45,900 million
• Die size: unknown versus 379 mm²
• Base clock: 400 MHz versus 930 MHz
• Boost clock: 2900 MHz versus 1680 MHz
• Memory size: System Shared versus 16 GB
• Memory type: System Shared versus GDDR6
• Memory bus width: System Shared versus 256 bit
• Memory bandwidth: System Dependent versus 576.0 GB/s
• Shading units: 256 versus 9,728
• TMUs: 16 versus 304
• ROPs: 8 versus 112
• RT cores: 4 versus 76
• Tensor cores: none versus 304
• Pixel rate: 23.20 GPixel/s versus 188.2 GPixel/s
• Texture rate: 46.40 GTexel/s versus 510.7 GTexel/s
• FP32: 1,484.8 GFLOPS versus 32.69 TFLOPS
• FP16: 1,484.8 GFLOPS (1:1) versus 32.69 TFLOPS (1:1)
• TDP: 15 W versus 150 W
• Bus interface: PCIe 4.0 x8 versus PCIe 4.0 x16
• Release date: 2025-02-28 versus 2023-03-20
• Predecessor: Navi II IGP versus Ampere-MW
• Successor: none versus Blackwell-MW

Identical fields include DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.4, slot width of IGP, no power connectors, and display outputs described as "Portable Device Dependent." Neither part has a launch MSRP listed. Both are marked Active in production status.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 5000 Embedded Ada Generation X2 delivers 32.69 TFLOPS, while the AMD Radeon 840M delivers 1,484.8 GFLOPS. The NVIDIA part is approximately 22 times higher.

Q: How much memory does each GPU have?

A: The AMD Radeon 840M uses System Shared memory, with capacity and bandwidth dependent on the host system. The NVIDIA RTX 5000 Embedded Ada Generation X2 has 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus with 576.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Do both GPUs support ray tracing?

A: Yes, both support ray tracing, but with different hardware resources. The AMD Radeon 840M has 4 RT cores, while the NVIDIA RTX 5000 Embedded Ada Generation X2 has 76 RT cores.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The AMD Radeon 840M has a TDP of 15 W, while the NVIDIA RTX 5000 Embedded Ada Generation X2 has a TDP of 150 W. The NVIDIA part consumes 10 times the power budget.

Q: Which GPU has tensor cores?

A: Only the NVIDIA RTX 5000 Embedded Ada Generation X2 has tensor cores, with 304 of them. The AMD Radeon 840M has no tensor cores listed.

Q: What API versions do both GPUs support?

A: Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The API feature sets are identical between the two parts.

The Verdict

The data divides cleanly along power and performance lines. The AMD Radeon 840M is a 15 W integrated GPU with a 2900 MHz boost clock, 256 shading units, and system-shared memory. It fits into portable devices where the 150 W TDP of the NVIDIA part would be impossible to cool or power. Its higher boost clock and smaller process node (4 nm versus 5 nm) suggest it is optimized for efficiency within tight thermal budgets.

The NVIDIA RTX 5000 Embedded Ada Generation X2 is the clear choice for workloads that demand compute throughput, memory bandwidth, or dedicated hardware features. Its 9,728 shading units, 76 RT cores, 304 tensor cores, and 576.0 GB/s of GDDR6 bandwidth place it in a different performance class entirely. The 32.69 TFLOPS FP32 figure is roughly 22 times that of the AMD part, and the 16 GB dedicated memory pool eliminates any dependency on host system memory.

The database shows no recorded benchmarks for either part, and both sit at the 50th percentile against all GPUs. The head-to-head benchmark fields are empty, so no measured performance delta exists. The verdict must therefore rest on the specification record.

For systems where power draw, thermal output, and physical integration are the primary constraints, the AMD Radeon 840M is the appropriate part. For systems where GPU compute, ray tracing, tensor acceleration, and memory bandwidth are the primary requirements, the NVIDIA RTX 5000 Embedded Ada Generation X2 is the only viable option between these two. The 10 times TDP increase on the NVIDIA side buys roughly 22 times the FP32 throughput, 11 times the texture rate, and 8 times the pixel rate, along with dedicated tensor cores and a high-bandwidth memory subsystem.