AMD Radeon 8040S vs AMD Radeon 860M Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows no direct head-to-head benchmark suite shared between the AMD Radeon 8040S and the AMD Radeon 860M. The two parts were measured under different test protocols, which complicates a straightforward score comparison. The Radeon 8040S was evaluated using PassMark tests, while the Radeon 860M was evaluated using Geekbench tests. This means the numbers come from separate measurement frameworks, and any comparison must rely on the overall average benchmark scores rather than matching individual test results.

The AMD Radeon 8040S delivers an average benchmark score of 2440. Its nearest rival in the database is the NVIDIA GeForce 710M with an average score of 2433, a delta of 0.3 percent, meaning the 8040S is essentially tied with that older discrete part. The Intel HD Graphics 610 sits at 2425, a 0.6 percent gap, and the NVIDIA GeForce GT 710M at 2422, a 0.7 percent gap. The only rival that edges ahead is the AMD Radeon RX 7400 at 2467, which beats the 8040S by 1.1 percent. These deltas are small, all within roughly one percent, indicating that the 8040S occupies a narrow performance band near the bottom of the discrete GPU hierarchy.

The AMD Radeon 860M, by contrast, posts an average benchmark score of 26401. That is nearly eleven times the average of the 8040S. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce MX550 at 26421, a delta of negative 0.1 percent, meaning the 860M trails by a hair. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 comes in at 26331, a 0.3 percent advantage for the 860M. The AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary scores 26553, putting it 0.6 percent ahead of the 860M, and the NVIDIA RTX A4000 at 26683 is 1.1 percent ahead. The 860M's percentile placement of 72 versus the 8040S's 17 shows a massive gulf in overall standing among all GPUs in the database.

The PassMark results for the 8040S reveal its strengths and weaknesses. The G3D score is 10578, which is the dominant component of its average. The G2D score is 1052, a modest figure for 2D workloads. The compute score is 5138, which is roughly half the G3D number. DirectX 9 yields a score of 134, DirectX 11 yields 80, DirectX 10 yields 48, and DirectX 12 yields 47. These API-specific numbers indicate that the 8040S performs better under older DirectX versions than newer ones, with DirectX 9 scoring nearly three times the DirectX 12 result.

The 860M has only two recorded benchmark entries, both from Geekbench. The OpenCL score is 22759, and the Vulkan score is 30043. The Vulkan result is about 32 percent higher than the OpenCL result, suggesting that the architecture handles the Vulkan API more efficiently. The average of these two tests, 26401, lands the 860M in the 72nd percentile of all GPUs, a strong mid-range position.

The absence of head-to-head benchmarks means the database does not contain a direct race between these two parts. The wins tally is zero for each, because no shared test exists. The comparison must therefore be framed through the overall averages and the relative positioning against each part's nearest rivals. The 8040S sits in the 17th percentile, while the 860M sits in the 72nd percentile. That percentile difference is the clearest single indicator of the performance gap, and it aligns with the raw average score disparity.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon 860M has an average benchmark score of 26401, while the AMD Radeon 8040S has an average benchmark score of 2440. The 860M's average is approximately 10.8 times higher.

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in their nearest rival deltas?

A: The 8040S is within 0.7 percent of three rivals (NVIDIA GeForce 710M, Intel HD Graphics 610, NVIDIA GeForce GT 710M) and trails the AMD Radeon RX 7400 by 1.1 percent. The 860M is within 0.6 percent of three rivals (NVIDIA GeForce MX550, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060, AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary) and trails the NVIDIA RTX A4000 by 1.1 percent.

Q: What benchmark tests were used for each GPU?

A: The 8040S was tested using PassMark DirectX 9, 10, 11, 12, G2D, G3D, and GPU compute tests. The 860M was tested using Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan tests.

Q: Which GPU has the higher percentile ranking?

A: The 860M ranks in the 72nd percentile of all GPUs, while the 8040S ranks in the 17th percentile.

Q: What is the DirectX 12 score for the 8040S?

A: The 8040S scores 47 in PassMark DirectX 12. The 860M does not have a recorded DirectX 12 score in the database.

Q: What is the Vulkan score for the 860M?

A: The 860M scores 30043 in Geekbench Vulkan. The 8040S does not have a recorded Vulkan score in the database.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs use the RDNA 3.5 architecture and are manufactured on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The 8040S uses the Strix Halo chip, while the 860M uses the Krackan Point chip. The 8040S belongs to the Navi Mobile (RX 8000M) generation, while the 860M belongs to the Navi III IGP (Strix Point Mobile) generation. The 8040S has a die size of 308 mm², while the 860M's die size is unknown in the database.

The shading unit counts differ substantially. The 8040S has 1024 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 32 raster output units. The 860M has 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 raster output units. Both have ray tracing cores, with the 8040S carrying 16 and the 860M carrying 8. Neither GPU has tensor cores listed.

Clock speeds also diverge. The 8040S has a base clock of 1295 MHz and a boost clock of 2800 MHz. The 860M has a base clock of 600 MHz and a boost clock of 3000 MHz. The 860M's boost clock is 200 MHz higher, but its base clock is 695 MHz lower. The 8040S compensates with more shading units and a higher base clock.

Pixel and texture rates reflect the resource differences. The 8040S achieves 89.60 GPixel/s and 179.2 GTexel/s. The 860M achieves 48.00 GPixel/s and 96.00 GTexel/s. The 8040S's pixel rate is 1.87 times higher, and its texture rate is 1.87 times higher. Floating-point performance follows the same pattern: the 8040S delivers 5.734 TFLOPS for both FP32 and FP16, while the 860M delivers 3.072 TFLOPS for both. The 8040S has 1.87 times the FP32 throughput.

The bus interface differs. The 8040S uses PCIe 5.0 x16, while the 860M uses PCIe 4.0 x8. This gives the 8040S a wider and newer interface, which matters for system memory access since both GPUs use system shared memory. Memory size, type, bus width, and bandwidth are all listed as system shared or system dependent for both, meaning the actual memory configuration varies with the host platform.

Both GPUs support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The display outputs are portable device dependent for both. The 8040S has a TDP of 55 W, while the 860M has a TDP of 15 W. Both are integrated graphics processors (IGP) with no power connectors and no slot width beyond the IGP designation.

The release dates differ. The 8040S was released on January 5, 2025, and the 860M was released on February 28, 2025. The 8040S's predecessor is Polaris Mobile, while the 860M's predecessor is Navi II IGP. Both are listed as active in production.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in every major specification field except architecture, process node, foundry, memory configuration, API support, slot width, power connectors, and production status. The 8040S uses the Strix Halo chip; the 860M uses the Krackan Point chip. The 8040S has a die size of 308 mm²; the 860M's die size is unknown. The 8040S has a base clock of 1295 MHz; the 860M has a base clock of 600 MHz. The boost clock is 2800 MHz for the 8040S and 3000 MHz for the 860M.

Shading units are 1024 versus 512. Texture mapping units are 64 versus 32. Raster output units are 32 versus 16. Ray tracing cores are 16 versus 8. The pixel rate is 89.60 GPixel/s versus 48.00 GPixel/s. The texture rate is 179.2 GTexel/s versus 96.00 GTexel/s. FP32 and FP16 performance is 5.734 TFLOPS versus 3.072 TFLOPS. The TDP is 55 W versus 15 W. The bus interface is PCIe 5.0 x16 versus PCIe 4.0 x8.

The 8040S belongs to the Navi Mobile (RX 8000M) generation, while the 860M belongs to the Navi III IGP (Strix Point Mobile) generation. The 8040S has a predecessor of Polaris Mobile; the 860M's predecessor is Navi II IGP. The release dates are January 5, 2025, and February 28, 2025, respectively. The 8040S has no launch MSRP listed, and the 860M also has no launch MSRP listed.

The 8040S has PassMark benchmark scores across seven tests. The 860M has Geekbench scores across two tests. The 8040S's average benchmark score is 2440, and its percentile is 17. The 860M's average benchmark score is 26401, and its percentile is 72. The nearest rivals for each part are entirely different sets of GPUs, reflecting their different performance tiers.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon 860M wins decisively in overall compute performance. Its average benchmark score of 26401 versus 2440 puts it in a different class. The 860M's Vulkan score of 30043 is particularly strong, indicating that applications using the Vulkan API will see the highest performance. Its OpenCL score of 22759 also exceeds the 8040S's total average by a wide margin. The 860M's 72nd percentile ranking places it among the better-performing mobile GPUs, close to discrete parts like the NVIDIA GeForce MX550 and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060.

The AMD Radeon 8040S wins in specific legacy API scenarios. Its PassMark DirectX 9 score of 134 is its highest API-specific result, and it outperforms its own DirectX 11 and DirectX 12 scores by substantial margins. The 8040S also has a G3D score of 10578, which is strong relative to its own average and shows that its 3D rasterization capability is the core of its performance. The 8040S's G2D score of 1052 indicates moderate 2D performance. Its compute score of 5138 is roughly half its G3D score, suggesting compute workloads are less efficient.

For power-sensitive deployments, the 860M has a clear advantage. Its TDP of 15 W is 40 W lower than the 8040S's 55 W, making it suitable for thin-and-light portable devices. The 8040S, with its 55 W TDP, requires more thermal headroom and likely a larger chassis. The 8040S compensates with a PCIe 5.0 x16 interface versus the 860M's PCIe 4.0 x8, which could matter in systems with high-bandwidth memory access needs.

The 8040S wins on raw throughput metrics. Its pixel rate of 89.60 GPixel/s is 1.87 times the 860M's 48.00 GPixel/s. Its texture rate of 179.2 GTexel/s is 1.87 times the 860M's 96.00 GTexel/s. Its FP32 throughput of 5.734 TFLOPS is 1.87 times the 860M's 3.072 TFLOPS. These ratios match the shading unit ratio, confirming that the 8040S's advantage is purely a function of its larger execution resources.

The 860M wins on clock speed at the boost level. Its 3000 MHz boost clock exceeds the 8040S's 2800 MHz by 200 MHz. The 860M also has a later release date, February 28, 2025, versus January 5, 2025. The 860M's nearest rival deltas are tighter, with three rivals within 0.6 percent, while the 8040S has three rivals within 0.7 percent. Both parts have equal support for DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API feature parity means the performance difference is purely computational.

In practical terms, the 860M is the part for modern, API-heavy workloads. Its Vulkan and OpenCL scores are its only recorded benchmarks, and they are both high. The 8040S is the part for older DirectX titles, where its DirectX 9 score of 134 dominates its other API results. The 8040S also has the advantage of a larger die at 308 mm², which likely enables its higher core counts, but the 860M achieves a better overall standing with half the shading units and a quarter of the TDP.