AMD Radeon 840M vs NVIDIA Switch 2 GPU Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no recorded benchmark scores for either the AMD Radeon 840M or the NVIDIA Switch 2 GPU. Both entries show an average benchmark score of zero, and the head-to-head benchmark array is empty. Consequently, there are no direct performance measurements to compare, no win counts to report for either side, and no percentile deltas from nearest rivals to reference. The percentile ranking for both GPUs is identical at 50, placing each at the midpoint of all GPUs tracked in the database.

Without benchmark data, the analysis must rely entirely on architectural specifications and theoretical throughput figures recorded in the database. The raw compute numbers do provide a clear separation. The NVIDIA Switch 2 GPU delivers 4,301 GFLOPS of FP32 throughput, which is 2.9 times the 1,484.8 GFLOPS recorded for the AMD Radeon 840M. In FP16 compute, the gap widens further: the Switch 2 GPU reaches 8,602 GFLOPS where the Radeon 840M remains at 1,484.8 GFLOPS, since the AMD part uses a 1:1 FP16 to FP32 ratio while the NVIDIA part uses a 2:1 ratio. Texture rate follows the same pattern, with the Switch 2 GPU at 67.20 GTexel/s versus 46.40 GTexel/s for the Radeon 840M, a 44.8 percent advantage. Pixel rate is nearly identical, with the Radeon 840M at 23.20 GPixel/s and the Switch 2 GPU at 22.40 GPixel/s, a difference of only 0.80 GPixel/s in favor of the AMD part.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different manufacturers and use different architectures. The AMD Radeon 840M is built on RDNA 3.5 and uses the Krackan Point chip, placed in the Navi III IGP generation for Strix Point Mobile. It is manufactured by TSMC on a 4 nm process. The NVIDIA Switch 2 GPU uses the Ampere architecture with the GA10B chip, classified as a Console GPU for Nintendo, and is manufactured by Samsung on an 8 nm process. The process node difference is substantial, with the AMD part using a smaller 4 nm node compared to the 8 nm node of the NVIDIA part.

The NVIDIA GPU has a recorded die size of 200 mm², while the AMD part has no die size or transistor count recorded in the database. Both entries list transistor counts as unknown, though the Switch 2 GPU provides a die area figure. The AMD Radeon 840M has no recorded die size at all.

The compute resource allocation differs significantly. The NVIDIA Switch 2 GPU uses 1,536 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, 16 raster output units, 12 RT cores, and 48 tensor cores. The AMD Radeon 840M uses 256 shading units, 16 texture mapping units, 8 raster output units, and 4 RT cores, with no tensor cores recorded. The NVIDIA part therefore has 6 times the shading units, 3 times the TMUs, 2 times the ROPs, and 3 times the RT cores of the AMD part. The presence of 48 tensor cores on the NVIDIA GPU and their absence on the AMD GPU marks a notable feature difference, as tensor cores are designed for AI and machine learning workloads.

Clock behavior also differs. The AMD Radeon 840M has a base clock of 400 MHz and a boost clock of 2,900 MHz, a very wide operating range. The NVIDIA Switch 2 GPU has a base clock of 561 MHz and a boost clock of 1,400 MHz, a narrower range with a higher floor but a much lower ceiling. The AMD part boosts to more than double the NVIDIA part's boost clock, which partially compensates for the NVIDIA part's larger shader count in raw throughput calculations.

API support is identical between the two. Both GPUs support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Both are listed as Active in production status.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA Switch 2 GPU wins on raw compute throughput across the board. Its FP32 figure of 4,301 GFLOPS is the largest single compute advantage in the comparison, and its FP16 figure of 8,602 GFLOPS doubles its own FP32 output due to the 2:1 ratio. The 48 tensor cores give it a capability the AMD part simply does not have, which matters for any workload that can use tensor core acceleration. Texture rate favors the NVIDIA part as well, at 67.20 GTexel/s versus 46.40 GTexel/s, meaning it can feed texture-heavy rendering pipelines faster. The NVIDIA GPU also has a fixed 12 GB memory allocation with a dedicated 128 bit bus and 102.4 GB/s bandwidth, which removes dependency on system memory conditions.

The AMD Radeon 840M wins on pixel rate, though narrowly, at 23.20 GPixel/s versus 22.40 GPixel/s. It also has a much higher boost clock at 2,900 MHz versus 1,400 MHz, and it is an integrated GPU with no power connector requirement, running at a 15 W TDP compared to the 40 W TDP of the NVIDIA part. The AMD GPU uses system shared memory, which means its bandwidth figure is listed as system dependent, and its memory behavior cannot be characterized independently of the host platform. The lower TDP and integrated nature make it suitable for thin portable devices, while the NVIDIA part is a console GPU with physical dimensions recorded at 272 mm by 116 mm by 14 mm.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every recorded specification. The AMD Radeon 840M uses the Krackan Point chip with RDNA 3.5 architecture, while the NVIDIA Switch 2 GPU uses the GA10B chip with Ampere architecture. Process nodes are 4 nm for AMD via TSMC and 8 nm for NVIDIA via Samsung. The AMD part is an IGP with a PCIe 4.0 x8 bus interface, while the NVIDIA part has no bus interface recorded and no display outputs, listed as "No outputs." The AMD part lists display outputs as portable device dependent, while the NVIDIA part has none.

Memory configurations are entirely different. The AMD Radeon 840M uses system shared memory with a system dependent bandwidth. The NVIDIA Switch 2 GPU has 12 GB of LPDDR5X memory on a 128 bit bus with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth, and its memory clock is recorded as 800 MHz with 6.4 Gbps effective transfer.

Compute units differ as detailed earlier: 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, 8 ROPs, and 4 RT cores for AMD versus 1,536 shading units, 48 TMUs, 16 ROPs, and 12 RT cores for NVIDIA. The NVIDIA part has 48 tensor cores, the AMD part has none. The AMD part has a 400 MHz base clock and 2,900 MHz boost, while the NVIDIA part has a 561 MHz base clock and 1,400 MHz boost.

Power figures differ: the AMD Radeon 840M runs at 15 W TDP with no power connectors and an IGP slot width, while the NVIDIA Switch 2 GPU runs at 40 W TDP with no power connector or slot width recorded.

Release dates differ by roughly three months. The AMD Radeon 840M was released on February 28, 2025, and the NVIDIA Switch 2 GPU on June 4, 2025. The AMD part has a predecessor listed as Navi II IGP, while the NVIDIA part has no predecessor recorded. Neither has a successor recorded. The NVIDIA Switch 2 GPU has a launch MSRP of 449 USD, while the AMD Radeon 840M has no launch MSRP recorded.

Physical dimensions are only recorded for the NVIDIA part, at 272 mm by 116 mm by 14 mm. The AMD part has no dimensions recorded, consistent with its IGP classification.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA Switch 2 GPU delivers 4,301 GFLOPS of FP32 throughput, compared to 1,484.8 GFLOPS for the AMD Radeon 840M.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same APIs?

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

Q: What memory does each GPU use?

A: The AMD Radeon 840M uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth. The NVIDIA Switch 2 GPU has 12 GB of LPDDR5X memory on a 128 bit bus with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has tensor cores?

A: The NVIDIA Switch 2 GPU has 48 tensor cores. The AMD Radeon 840M has no tensor cores recorded.

Q: What are the TDP figures for each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon 840M has a 15 W TDP, while the NVIDIA Switch 2 GPU has a 40 W TDP.

Q: Does the NVIDIA Switch 2 GPU have display outputs?

A: No, the database lists its display outputs as "No outputs." The AMD Radeon 840M lists display outputs as portable device dependent.

The Verdict

The recorded data points to a clear split by use case. The NVIDIA Switch 2 GPU offers substantially higher compute throughput in every measured category except pixel rate. Its 4,301 GFLOPS FP32 output, 8,602 GFLOPS FP16 output, 67.20 GTexel/s texture rate, 48 tensor cores, and fixed 12 GB memory pool with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth make it the stronger choice for workloads that demand raw rendering and compute power. Its 449 USD launch MSRP and 40 W TDP place it as a dedicated console-class component.

The AMD Radeon 840M operates in a different class. It is an integrated GPU with a 15 W TDP, no power connectors, system shared memory, and a 2,900 MHz boost clock that is more than double the NVIDIA part's boost clock. Its pixel rate of 23.20 GPixel/s edges out the NVIDIA part's 22.40 GPixel/s. The AMD part suits systems where power draw and integration matter more than absolute throughput. The data does not support a single winner across all metrics, but it does show the NVIDIA Switch 2 GPU as the dominant compute resource in this comparison, with the AMD Radeon 840M retaining advantages in pixel fill, clock speed, and power efficiency.