AMD
Radeon RX 6900 XT vs GeForce 840M
Full comparison of specs, performance and benchmarks
NVIDIA
GeForce 840M
Aggregate performance score
We've compared RX 6900 XT and GeForce 840M across specs and all relevant benchmarks.
↗RX 6900 XT outperforms GeForce 840M by ~84% on the catalog index; this is not a measured FPS gain.+84%
Scores are normalized on the Head to Head scale. Higher is better. How is this calculated?H2HBench Data Quality
Low confidenceSpecifications: Field verification not recordedVerified gaming results: 0Estimated / unverified results: 32Price record updated: Sep 6, 2026
Limited verified data
H2HBench Verdict
Higher catalog score: Radeon RX 6900 XT (~26%)
The score difference is not a measured FPS improvement.
Reasons to consider RX 6900 XT
- Higher catalog performance index
- More graphics memory
- Higher catalog value index
- Recorded feature support: OpenCL 2.1 · FSR
Reasons to consider GeForce 840M
- Lower stated power consumption
- Recorded feature support: OpenCL 3.0, CUDA 5.0 · Not supported
Catalog metrics radar
Axes with missing data are hidden; every value uses a fixed scale.
AMD
NVIDIAPerformance
Efficiency
Price / performance
Memory capacity
5731
63100
5854
8843
Graphics card ranking
Positions 52–57of 321
Which should you choose?
Two practical conclusions based on community votes and gaming value.
Radeon RX 6900 XT
133 likesHead to Head visitors currently choose this model more often.
Overview
Scores are calculated from specifications, performance, and efficiency.
GamesDirectX, OpenCL, and Vulkan performance
57Better
31
Professional applications3D modeling, video editing, and rendering
47Better
29
AI and machine learningMachine-learning and AI capabilities
45Better
26
Power efficiencyPower consumption across workloads
63
100Better
Head to Head scoreOverall catalog score
54Better
43
Specifications
The better numeric value is highlighted in green, taking the metric direction into account.
DisplayPort
HDMI
Device class
Upscaling
DirectX
Vulkan
OpenGL
TFLOPSBetter
Power consumptionBetter
Memory type
Power connector
Release date
Architecture
Thickness
Compute API
Launch price—
Shader units / coresBetter
Clock speedBetter
Base clockBetter
Boost clockBetter
VRAMBetter
Memory frequencyBetter
Memory busBetter
Memory bandwidthBetter
Interface
Power consumptionBetter
Process nodeBetter
Recommended PSU
Length
Die sizeBetter
Memory cache
Transistor countBetter
Max monitors
Max resolution
USB Type-C
Gaming FPS
Available results are shown separately; missing data is not treated as zero.
The Gaming FPS section compares RX 6900 XT and GeForce 840M across curated H2H Lab game presets. The useful signal is not only average FPS, but also how each device behaves at 1440p and 4K, how memory capacity and bus width affect heavy textures, and whether the game engine favors raster performance, ray tracing, or driver maturity.
RX 6900 XTGeForce 840M
Verified externalEstimatedSources ↗
Counter-Strike 2
1080p High
233 FPS
154 FPS
1080p Ultra
164 FPS
108 FPS
1440p Ultra
127 FPS
58 FPS
4K Ultra
63 FPS
21 FPS
Counter-Strike 2RX 6900 XT233 FPSGeForce 840M154 FPSRX 6900 XT164 FPSGeForce 840M108 FPSRX 6900 XT127 FPSGeForce 840M58 FPSRX 6900 XT63 FPSGeForce 840M21 FPS
Cyberpunk 2077RX 6900 XT150 FPSGeForce 840M100 FPSRX 6900 XT129 FPSGeForce 840M86 FPSRX 6900 XT92 FPSGeForce 840M42 FPSRX 6900 XT42 FPSGeForce 840M14 FPS
Forza Horizon 5RX 6900 XT189 FPSGeForce 840M126 FPSRX 6900 XT123 FPSGeForce 840M81 FPSRX 6900 XT114 FPSGeForce 840M52 FPSRX 6900 XT93 FPSGeForce 840M31 FPS
Hogwarts LegacyRX 6900 XT123 FPSGeForce 840M81 FPSRX 6900 XT103 FPSGeForce 840M68 FPSRX 6900 XT83 FPSGeForce 840M38 FPSRX 6900 XT43 FPSGeForce 840M14 FPS
H2H workload indices
Comparable internal indices on a fixed 0–100 scale.
H2H Raster IndexH2H Index / 100573159%
H2H Compute IndexH2H Index / 100643461%
H2H Rendering IndexH2H Index / 100663464%
H2H Memory Workload IndexH2H Index / 100884369%
H2H Efficiency IndexH2H Index / 1006310045%
These are versioned H2H calculated indices derived from normalized catalog data. They are not results from a third-party benchmark.
H2H AI workload indices
Estimated workload profiles based on available performance and memory data.
H2H Image Generation IndexH2H Index / 100713665%
H2H ML Training IndexH2H Index / 100693663%
H2H Inference IndexH2H Index / 100663464%
H2H Local LLM IndexH2H Index / 100743864%
H2H Computer Vision IndexH2H Index / 100663561%
These are versioned H2H calculated indices derived from normalized catalog data. They are not results from a third-party benchmark.
Graphics APIs, SDKs and upscaling
DirectX12.211.0
Vulkan1.41.4
OpenGL4.64.6
UpscalingFSRNot supported
Compute APIOpenCL 2.1OpenCL 3.0, CUDA 5.0
Architecture and release
ArchitectureRDNA 2.0Kepler / Maxwell
Process node7 nmBetter28 nm
Release date20202014
Device classDesktopMobile
GPU cores, die and clocks
Transistor count26800 millionBetter1020 million
Die size520 mm²77 mm²Better
Shader units / cores5120Better384
Base clock1825 MHzBetter1029 MHz
Boost clock2250 MHzBetter1124 MHz
Board size, power and compatibility
InterfacePCIe 4x16PCIe 3.0 x8
Length267 mmOEM dependent
ThicknessTriple-slotIGP
Recommended PSU700 WOEM dependent
Power connector8+8 pinNone
Display outputs and limits
HDMIHDMI 2.1OEM dependent
DisplayPortDisplayPort 1.4aOEM dependent
USB Type-CYesOEM dependent
Max monitors4OEM dependent
Max resolution7680 × 4320Depends on host system
Memory and compute throughput
VRAM16 GB GDDR6Better2 GB DDR3
Memory typeGDDR6GDDR5 / DDR3
Memory bus256 bitBetter64 bit
TFLOPS23.04Better0.863
Other comparisons
Arc A380IntelReviews and questions
Explain this comparison
Beyond percentages: causes, relevant specifications, and practical impact behind every chart.
What AI will explain
Overall score, radar, FPS, synthetic tests, specifications, efficiency, and value.
Evidence details
Data coverage
- Verified gaming results
- 0
- Verified synthetic results
- 0
- Games with verified results
- 0
- Verified community results
- 0
- Estimated / unverified results
- 32
- Specifications
- 0 / 69
Calculated scores · How is this calculated?
Scores use the catalog model and may include estimated inputs. Open each score to see its origin and the methodology.
clamp(round(performance × 0.7 + (efficiency ?? 50) × 0.2 + (value is missing ? 0 : (value − 50) × 0.2)), 0, 100)Price evidence · View sources (3)
Verified community results
No verified community benchmarks yet.
Reviewed by
No individual editorial review is recorded for this comparison.
Comparison history
Show recorded changes (4)
- · Record updated: products
- · Record changed: product_prices
- · Record updated: products
- · Record updated: products
Why you can trust this comparison
Origin and confidence are evaluated from the evidence attached to each value. Unverified results are identified, and specification, benchmark and price dates remain separate.
Owner experiences
Real builds, results, and community feedback.
Moderator reviewedHelpful to the communityExpert badges
Frequently asked comparison questions
Short recommendations based on performance, memory, power consumption, and intended use.
01Which is better for gaming: RX 6900 XT or GeForce 840M?+
RX 6900 XT has the higher overall gaming score, while RX 6900 XT offers the better price-to-performance ratio. The final choice depends on resolution and settings.
02Which is better for streaming?+
GeForce 840M is the stronger streaming choice thanks to performance, hardware encoding, and application support. Check AV1, H.264, and HEVC support before buying.
03Which is better for Blender?+
GeForce 840M is generally the better option for Blender and GPU rendering. Rendering-engine support and available VRAM also matter.
04Which is better for video editing?+
RX 6900 XT offers more overall performance, while RX 6900 XT offers more memory headroom. Codecs, hardware encoders, and editor optimization can change the result.
05Which is better for neural networks and AI?+
GeForce 840M is the more practical option for local AI workloads. VRAM capacity, compute libraries, and framework compatibility are especially important.
06Which is better for 1080p?+
RX 6900 XT is the most rational 1080p choice, where high frame rates and cost per frame matter most.
07Which is better for 1440p?+
RX 6900 XT leads in combined 1440p performance. RX 6900 XT can be preferable for heavy textures and games with high VRAM usage.
08Which is better for 4K?+
RX 6900 XT is preferable for 4K, where total performance, memory bandwidth, and VRAM capacity have the greatest impact.
09Which is better for a quiet PC?+
GeForce 840M is easier to use in a quiet build because of its lower estimated power and thermal load. Actual noise depends on the specific cooler.
10Which is better without replacing the power supply?+
GeForce 840M is the safer candidate because its stated power consumption is lower. Verify PSU wattage, age, and power connectors.
11Is it worth upgrading from the previous generation?+
Consider upgrading to RX 6900 XT if your current device no longer delivers the required FPS, memory capacity, or feature support. A gain below 15–20% is usually worth waiting for a price cut.