NVIDIA GeForce 840M vs AMD Radeon HD 7620G IGP
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce 840M and AMD Radeon HD 7620G IGP videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Technologies. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Differences
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce 840M
- Videocard is newer: launch date 1 year(s) 9 month(s) later
- 2.9x more core clock speed: 1029 MHz vs 360 MHz
- 2.3x more boost clock speed: 1124 MHz vs 497 MHz
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 28 nm vs 32 nm
- 3x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 1096 vs 364
- Around 35% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 151 vs 112
- 4.7x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 5745 vs 1232
- Around 51% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 2736 vs 1810
- Around 51% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 2736 vs 1810
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 12 March 2014 vs 15 May 2012 |
| Core clock speed | 1029 MHz vs 360 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1124 MHz vs 497 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm vs 32 nm |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1096 vs 364 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 151 vs 112 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 5745 vs 1232 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2736 vs 1810 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2736 vs 1810 |
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon HD 7620G IGP
- Around 32% lower typical power consumption: 25 Watt vs 33 Watt
- Around 5% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3357 vs 3191
- Around 5% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3357 vs 3191
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 25 Watt vs 33 Watt |
| Benchmarks | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3357 vs 3191 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3357 vs 3191 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce 840M
GPU 2: AMD Radeon HD 7620G IGP
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
| Name | NVIDIA GeForce 840M | AMD Radeon HD 7620G IGP |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1096 | 364 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 151 | 112 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 5745 | 1232 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 22.848 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 162.594 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.237 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 21.15 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 95.545 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2085 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2736 | 1810 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3191 | 3357 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2085 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2736 | 1810 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3191 | 3357 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 503 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| NVIDIA GeForce 840M | AMD Radeon HD 7620G IGP | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Maxwell | TeraScale 3 |
| Code name | GM108 | Devastator |
| Launch date | 12 March 2014 | 15 May 2012 |
| Place in performance rating | 1256 | 1259 |
| Type | Laptop | Desktop |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1124 MHz | 497 MHz |
| Core clock speed | 1029 MHz | 360 MHz |
| Floating-point performance | 863.2 gflops | |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 32 nm |
| Pipelines | 384 | |
| Texture fill rate | 17.98 GTexel / s | |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 33 Watt | 25 Watt |
| Transistor count | 1,303 million | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Bus support | PCI Express 2.0, PCI Express 3.0 | |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | IGP |
| Laptop size | medium sized | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 11.2 (11_0) |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.4 |
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | |
| Memory bandwidth | 16.02 GB / s | |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | |
| Memory clock speed | 2002 MHz | |
| Memory type | DDR3 | |
| Shared memory | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
| CUDA | ||
| GameWorks | ||
| GeForce Experience | ||
| GPU Boost | ||
| Optimus | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare NVIDIA GeForce 840M with others
NVIDIAGeForce 840M vs
ATIRadeon 9000
NVIDIAGeForce 840M vs
ATIRadeon X1600
NVIDIAGeForce 840M vs
AMDRadeon HD 7620G IGP
NVIDIAGeForce 840M vs
NVIDIAQuadro K2000M
NVIDIAGeForce 840M vs
NVIDIAGRID K180Q
NVIDIAGeForce 840M vs
AMDRadeon R7 M260DX
