AMD Radeon 880M vs NVIDIA N1 20SM Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data presents an unusual comparison: the AMD Radeon 880M has a full set of benchmark scores, while the NVIDIA N1 20SM has no recorded benchmark results in the database. The head-to-head benchmark table is empty, and the win count for each side is zero. This means a direct numeric comparison of measured performance cannot be made from the available data.

The AMD Radeon 880M delivers an average benchmark score of 8436 across its ten recorded tests. Its percentile ranking sits at 43, meaning it places above roughly 43% of all GPUs in the database. The nearest rivals for the 880M are tightly clustered: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX scores 8427 (0.1% ahead of the 880M), the NVIDIA GeForce MX330 scores 8458 (0.3% ahead), the AMD Radeon HD 8870M also scores 8462 (0.3% ahead), and the AMD Radeon R9 M375X scores 8325 (1.3% behind). These deltas are all within a couple of percentage points, indicating the 880M sits in a very competitive mid-range band.

Individual benchmark results for the 880M show substantial variation across workloads. In Geekbench Vulkan, it reaches 40006 points, while in Geekbench OpenCL it scores 31285. The Passmark G3D score is 7615, and the Passmark G2D score is 969. Compute performance in Passmark GPU Compute is 3719. Older DirectX tests show lower scores: Passmark DirectX 9 yields 97, DirectX 11 yields 73, DirectX 10 yields 31, and DirectX 12 yields 32. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test produces a score of 535.

Since the NVIDIA N1 20SM has zero benchmarks and an average score of zero, the database provides no measured evidence for its performance. Its percentile is listed as 50, but without actual scores, this figure lacks supporting test data. The head-to-head section therefore cannot report any wins for either product.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon 880M demonstrates clear strengths in specific benchmark categories based on its recorded results. Its highest relative performance appears in Geekbench Vulkan, where the 40006 score far exceeds its OpenCL result of 31285, suggesting strong graphics API utilization. The Passmark G3D score of 7615 indicates solid general 3D rendering capability, while the Passmark GPU Compute score of 3719 reveals a more moderate compute throughput.

The 880M shows a notable gap between its DirectX 9 performance (97) and its DirectX 11 (73) and DirectX 12 (32) results. This pattern suggests the architecture handles legacy workloads with relative ease but does not scale proportionally into newer DirectX 12 titles. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 535 reinforces this: modern DX12 workloads produce modest results compared to the Vulkan path.

The NVIDIA N1 20SM has no benchmark wins because no benchmark data exists for it. The database lists its percentile as 50, which would imply a median position among all GPUs, but without any actual test scores, this percentile cannot be verified or interpreted. The wins column for the N1 20SM is zero.

For the 880M, the wins column is also zero in the head-to-head comparison, but that reflects the absence of a direct comparison rather than a lack of capability. The nearest rival data shows the 880M is within 0.3% of three competing mobile GPUs and 1.3% ahead of one, so it wins against the R9 M375X by a narrow margin but loses slightly to the others.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon 880M uses the Strix Point chip built on RDNA 3.5 architecture, fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The NVIDIA N1 20SM uses the GB20B chip based on Blackwell 2.0 architecture, fabricated on a 5 nm process, also at TSMC. The process node difference is one nanometer, with AMD on the smaller node.

The 880M integrates 34,000 million transistors on a 233 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 145.9 million transistors per square millimeter. The N1 20SM has an unknown transistor count but a larger die size of 382 mm², with no density figure recorded. The die size difference is substantial: the N1 20SM's die is roughly 64% larger by area.

Shading unit counts diverge sharply. The 880M has 768 shading units, while the N1 20SM has 2560, a 3.3x difference. Texture mapping units follow the same pattern: 48 on the 880M versus 160 on the N1 20SM, a 3.3x gap. Raster operation units are closer, with 16 on the 880M and 24 on the N1 20SM.

Ray tracing cores differ as well: the 880M has 12, while the N1 20SM has 20. The N1 20SM additionally includes 80 tensor cores, a feature the 880M does not list at all. The 880M's FP32 throughput is 4.454 TFLOPS, while the N1 20SM reaches 12.01 TFLOPS, a 2.7x advantage. Both have 1:1 FP16 to FP32 ratios, meaning FP16 performance equals FP32 performance on each.

Pixel rates show the N1 20SM at 56.30 GPixel/s versus 46.40 GPixel/s for the 880M, a 21% advantage. Texture rates diverge more: 375.4 GTexel/s versus 139.2 GTexel/s, a 2.7x difference. The N1 20SM's higher texture rate aligns with its larger TMU count.

Specification Differences

Clock speeds differ significantly. The 880M has a base clock of 400 MHz and a boost clock of 2900 MHz. The N1 20SM has a base clock of 741 MHz and a boost clock of 2346 MHz. The N1 20SM starts higher but boosts lower, while the 880M has a wider clock range with a much higher peak.

Memory configurations are entirely different. The 880M uses system shared memory, meaning its size, type, bus width, and bandwidth are all system dependent. The N1 20SM has dedicated memory: 128 GB of LPDDR5X on a 256-bit bus, delivering 273.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The memory clock for the N1 20SM is 1067 MHz, translating to 8.5 Gbps effective.

The bus interface differs as well. The 880M uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the N1 20SM uses PCIe 5.0 x16. The N1 20SM has double the lane count and a newer PCIe generation. Display outputs also differ: the 880M is portable device dependent, while the N1 20SM provides one HDMI output.

API support shows a stark contrast. The 880M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The N1 20SM lists DirectX as N/A, OpenGL as N/A, and Vulkan as N/A, indicating no conventional graphics API support in the recorded data.

Power specifications: the 880M has a TDP of 15 W, while the N1 20SM's TDP is unknown. Both are IGP slot width with no power connectors. The 880M's release date is 2024-07-14, while the N1 20SM's release date is 2026-05-31, nearly two years later. The 880M has a predecessor listed as Navi II IGP; the N1 20SM has no predecessor. Neither has a successor or a launch MSRP.

FAQ

Q: Does the NVIDIA N1 20SM have any benchmark scores in the database?

A: No. The N1 20SM has an empty benchmarks array, an average benchmark score of zero, and no nearest rivals listed. Its percentile is recorded as 50, but no test results support that figure.

Q: How does the AMD Radeon 880M compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The 880M's average score of 8436 is 0.1% behind the GTX 675MX (8427), 0.3% behind the MX330 (8458), 0.3% behind the HD 8870M (8462), and 1.3% ahead of the R9 M375X (8325). All rivals fall within a 1.6% spread.

Q: What is the most significant architectural difference between the two GPUs?

A: The shading unit count. The N1 20SM has 2560 shading units versus 768 on the 880M, a 3.3x difference. Texture mapping units show the same ratio (160 versus 48), while raster operation units are closer (24 versus 16).

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute throughput?

A: The NVIDIA N1 20SM delivers 12.01 TFLOPS FP32, which is 2.7x higher than the AMD Radeon 880M's 4.454 TFLOPS. Both run FP16 at the same rate as FP32 (1:1 ratio).

Q: How do the memory systems differ?

A: The 880M uses system shared memory with no dedicated VRAM, making bandwidth system dependent. The N1 20SM has 128 GB of LPDDR5X on a 256-bit bus with 273.2 GB/s bandwidth and an 8.5 Gbps effective memory clock.

Q: What API support does each GPU provide?

A: The 880M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The N1 20SM records DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan all as N/A, indicating no conventional graphics API support in the database.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear but incomplete picture. The AMD Radeon 880M has extensive benchmark coverage and sits in a competitive position among mid-range mobile GPUs, with all nearest rivals within 1.3% of its average score. Its Vulkan performance (40006) significantly exceeds its OpenCL result (31285), and its Passmark G3D score of 7615 indicates functional 3D rendering capability. The 880M also carries a low 15 W TDP, making it suitable for power-constrained portable devices.

The NVIDIA N1 20SM, by contrast, has no benchmark data whatsoever. Its architectural specifications are impressive on paper: 2560 shading units, 80 tensor cores, 12.01 TFLOPS FP32, and 273.2 GB/s of memory bandwidth from 128 GB of LPDDR5X. The die size of 382 mm² is notably larger than the 880M's 233 mm², and the PCIe 5.0 x16 interface is two generations newer than the 880M's PCIe 4.0 x8. However, without any recorded test scores, the N1 20SM's real-world performance cannot be assessed from the database.

The N1 20SM's N/A API support for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan raises questions about its intended use case. It may target compute or AI workloads rather than traditional graphics rendering, which would explain the absence of conventional graphics benchmarks. The 880M, with full graphics API support and active production status, is clearly aimed at standard graphics tasks.

For users who need verified benchmark data, the AMD Radeon 880M is the only option with measurable results. Its performance cluster around the GTX 675MX and MX330 provides a concrete reference point. For those considering the NVIDIA N1 20SM, the database offers no evidence of performance, only specifications. The choice depends on whether unverified specifications outweigh measured results. The 880M's 43rd percentile and tight rival margins suggest a capable mid-range IGP, while the N1 20SM's 50th percentile remains an unvalidated claim without supporting scores.