AMD Radeon RX 6450M vs NVIDIA N1X 40SM Comparison

FAQ

Q: What are the core architectural differences between the AMD Radeon RX 6450M and the NVIDIA N1X 40SM?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6450M uses the RDNA 2.0 architecture on a 6 nm TSMC process, with a Navi 24 chip. The NVIDIA N1X 40SM uses the Blackwell 2.0 architecture on a 5 nm TSMC process, with a GB20B chip. The NVIDIA part has a much larger die at 382 mm² compared to AMD's 107 mm², though AMD's transistor count is listed at 5,400 million while NVIDIA's is unknown.

Q: How do the memory configurations compare?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6450M has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus with 128.0 GB/s bandwidth. The NVIDIA N1X 40SM has 128 GB of LPDDR5X memory on a 256-bit bus with 273.2 GB/s bandwidth. The NVIDIA part delivers more than double the memory bandwidth and 32 times the memory capacity.

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute throughput?

A: The NVIDIA N1X 40SM delivers 24.02 TFLOPS FP32 and 24.02 TFLOPS FP16 (1:1). The AMD Radeon RX 6450M delivers 3.779 TFLOPS FP32 and 7.557 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1). In FP32, the NVIDIA part is approximately 6.4 times higher.

Q: What API support does each GPU provide?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6450M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA N1X 40SM lists DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan as N/A, indicating no supported APIs are recorded in the database for this part.

Q: How do the shading resources compare between the two?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6450M has 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, 32 ROPs, and 12 ray tracing cores. The NVIDIA N1X 40SM has 5,120 shading units, 320 TMUs, 40 ROPs, 40 ray tracing cores, and 160 tensor cores.

Q: What are the clock speeds of each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6450M has a base clock of 2000 MHz, a boost clock of 2460 MHz, and a game clock of 2220 MHz. The NVIDIA N1X 40SM has a base clock of 741 MHz and a boost clock of 2346 MHz, with no game clock listed.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon RX 6450M and NVIDIA N1X 40SM represent two distinct architectural generations and design philosophies. AMD's part uses the RDNA 2.0 architecture, built on TSMC's 6 nm process with a Navi 24 chip. NVIDIA's part uses the Blackwell 2.0 architecture, built on TSMC's 5 nm process with a GB20B chip. The process node difference, 6 nm versus 5 nm, gives NVIDIA a manufacturing advantage in density potential, although AMD's die is substantially smaller at 107 mm² versus NVIDIA's 382 mm².

The transistor counts differ significantly. AMD lists 5,400 million transistors on its 107 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 50.5M per mm². NVIDIA's transistor count is unknown, so no density comparison can be calculated from the recorded data. The difference in die size alone, however, indicates that NVIDIA's chip integrates far more logic and memory resources.

The memory subsystems are fundamentally different. AMD uses 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, producing 128.0 GB/s of bandwidth. NVIDIA uses 128 GB of LPDDR5X on a 256-bit bus, producing 273.2 GB/s of bandwidth. NVIDIA's memory clock is 1067 MHz with 8.5 Gbps effective, while AMD's memory clock is 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective. The wider bus on the NVIDIA part compensates for the lower per-pin data rate.

Compute resources show a large gap. AMD provides 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, 32 ROPs, and 12 ray tracing cores. NVIDIA provides 5,120 shading units, 320 TMUs, 40 ROPs, 40 ray tracing cores, and 160 tensor cores. NVIDIA also has tensor cores, which AMD lacks entirely. The FP32 throughput difference, 3.779 TFLOPS versus 24.02 TFLOPS, reflects this resource disparity.

The bus interfaces differ as well. AMD uses PCIe 4.0 x4, while NVIDIA uses PCIe 5.0 x16. The NVIDIA interface provides more lanes and a newer generation, enabling higher data transfer rates to the host system. Both are integrated graphics processors (IGP) with no power connectors. AMD's TDP is 50 W, while NVIDIA's TDP is unknown in the database.

Release timing also differs. AMD's part was released on January 3, 2023, while NVIDIA's part has a release date of May 31, 2026. This places the NVIDIA part in a later generation within the database's timeline. AMD's predecessor is Polaris Mobile, while NVIDIA has no recorded predecessor.

The Verdict

The recorded data shows two GPUs at opposite ends of the integrated graphics spectrum. The AMD Radeon RX 6450M, with a 50th percentile ranking among all GPUs, delivers 3.779 TFLOPS FP32, 128.0 GB/s bandwidth, and a 64-bit memory bus. The NVIDIA N1X 40SM, also at the 50th percentile, delivers 24.02 TFLOPS FP32, 273.2 GB/s bandwidth, and a 256-bit memory bus.

For workloads that depend on raw FP32 throughput, the NVIDIA N1X 40SM is the clear choice. Its 24.02 TFLOPS FP32 figure is roughly 6.4 times higher than the AMD part. For FP16 workloads, NVIDIA again leads with 24.02 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio, while AMD's 7.557 TFLOPS uses a 2:1 ratio, indicating a hardware tradeoff rather than true 1:1 FP16 performance.

For memory-heavy applications, NVIDIA's 273.2 GB/s bandwidth and 128 GB capacity provide a substantial buffer over AMD's 128.0 GB/s and 4 GB. The 256-bit bus versus 64-bit bus difference is a fundamental structural advantage.

For ray tracing, NVIDIA has 40 ray tracing cores versus AMD's 12. NVIDIA also adds 160 tensor cores, which AMD does not have at all. These features make the NVIDIA part more suitable for workloads involving ray-traced rendering or tensor-based computation.

The AMD part does have advantages in clock speed. Its base clock of 2000 MHz and boost clock of 2460 MHz exceed NVIDIA's 741 MHz base and 2346 MHz boost. However, the higher clocks do not compensate for the massive difference in shading units and memory resources.

The database shows no head-to-head benchmark results, no wins for either GPU, and no nearest rivals. Both GPUs share the 50th percentile ranking, reflecting an average position in the aggregate GPU distribution. Users selecting between these parts should base their decision on the structural specifications: NVIDIA for compute density, memory bandwidth, and tensor capabilities; AMD for a smaller, lower-power IGP with a 50 W TDP.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every recorded specification field.

Process and Die: AMD uses 6 nm TSMC with a 107 mm² die and 5,400 million transistors. NVIDIA uses 5 nm TSMC with a 382 mm² die and unknown transistor count. AMD's transistor density is 50.5M per mm²; NVIDIA's is not recorded.

Clocks: AMD's base clock is 2000 MHz, boost is 2460 MHz, and game clock is 2220 MHz. NVIDIA's base clock is 741 MHz, boost is 2346 MHz, and no game clock is listed. Memory clocks differ: AMD at 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective, NVIDIA at 1067 MHz with 8.5 Gbps effective.

Memory: AMD has 4 GB GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus with 128.0 GB/s bandwidth. NVIDIA has 128 GB LPDDR5X on a 256-bit bus with 273.2 GB/s bandwidth.

Compute Units: AMD has 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, 32 ROPs, and 12 ray tracing cores. NVIDIA has 5,120 shading units, 320 TMUs, 40 ROPs, 40 ray tracing cores, and 160 tensor cores. AMD has no tensor cores.

Rates: AMD's pixel rate is 78.72 GPixel/s and texture rate is 118.1 GTexel/s. NVIDIA's pixel rate is 93.84 GPixel/s and texture rate is 750.7 GTexel/s.

Compute Throughput: AMD delivers 3.779 TFLOPS FP32 and 7.557 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1). NVIDIA delivers 24.02 TFLOPS FP32 and 24.02 TFLOPS FP16 (1:1).

Power and Interface: AMD has a 50 W TDP and PCIe 4.0 x4. NVIDIA's TDP is unknown and it uses PCIe 5.0 x16. Both are IGP slot width with no power connectors.

Display and APIs: AMD's display outputs are portable device dependent. NVIDIA has 1x HDMI. AMD supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. NVIDIA lists DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan as N/A.

Release and Status: AMD was released on January 3, 2023. NVIDIA was released on May 31, 2026. Both are marked as Active production status. AMD's predecessor is Polaris Mobile; NVIDIA has none recorded.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

No head-to-head benchmark entries exist in the database for this pairing. The wins count for both GPUs is zero. The nearest rivals lists are empty for both parts. The average benchmark score for each GPU is zero. The recorded data therefore cannot support a direct performance comparison based on measured workloads.

The structural specifications provide the only basis for comparison. In FP32 throughput, the NVIDIA N1X 40SM shows a 24.02 TFLOPS figure against AMD's 3.779 TFLOPS. This is a difference of approximately 6.4 times. In FP16, NVIDIA's 24.02 TFLOPS at 1:1 ratio compares to AMD's 7.557 TFLOPS at 2:1 ratio. The NVIDIA part delivers roughly 3.2 times the FP16 throughput, and it does so without the 2:1 efficiency penalty.

Texture rate favors NVIDIA by a wide margin. NVIDIA's 750.7 GTexel/s is about 6.4 times higher than AMD's 118.1 GTexel/s, matching the ratio of TMU counts (320 versus 48). Pixel rate shows a narrower gap: NVIDIA at 93.84 GPixel/s versus AMD at 78.72 GPixel/s, a difference of roughly 19 percent. This smaller gap reflects the ROP counts of 40 versus 32.

Memory bandwidth favors NVIDIA at 273.2 GB/s versus 128.0 GB/s, a factor of about 2.1 times. The bus width difference of 256-bit versus 64-bit is the primary driver. Memory capacity differs by a factor of 32, with NVIDIA at 128 GB and AMD at 4 GB.

Ray tracing resources show NVIDIA with 40 ray tracing cores versus AMD's 12. Tensor cores exist only on the NVIDIA part, with 160 units. The NVIDIA part's pixel rate, texture rate, FP32, and FP16 figures all exceed AMD's corresponding values. AMD's only recorded advantages are higher base and boost clocks, a lower TDP at 50 W, and a smaller die size.

The absence of benchmark data and nearest rivals means no percentile deltas can be reported. Both GPUs sit at the 50th percentile of all GPUs in the database. The recorded specifications indicate that the NVIDIA N1X 40SM holds the structural advantage in nearly every compute and memory metric, while the AMD Radeon RX 6450M offers a lighter-weight IGP solution with a defined 50 W power envelope.