AMD Radeon 8060S vs AMD Radeon 860M Comparison

AMD Radeon 8060S and AMD Radeon 860M are both integrated graphics processors from AMD, built on the RDNA 3.5 architecture and fabricated on TSMC's 4 nm process. The 8060S, part of the Strix Halo chip, sits in the Navi Mobile (RX 8000M) generation, while the 860M is a Krackan Point chip in the Navi III IGP (Strix Point Mobile) generation. The recorded benchmark data shows a decisive performance gap between the two, with the 8060S delivering over 2.7 times the OpenCL score of the 860M and nearly 2.7 times the Vulkan score. Both parts are active production units, with the 8060S released in January 2025 and the 860M following in February 2025.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark results are unambiguous: the AMD Radeon 8060S wins every recorded test. Across two head-to-head benchmarks, the 8060S takes 2 wins out of 2, while the 860M records no wins. The database places the 8060S at the 87th percentile among all GPUs, while the 860M sits at the 72nd percentile. This percentile gap places the 8060S in a substantially higher performance tier, one that rivals discrete desktop graphics cards.

The 8060S delivers an average benchmark score of 55757, which puts it 0.1% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE 12 GB, 0.6% behind the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080, 1.7% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro W5700X, and 2.8% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080. These deltas show that the 8060S competes with high-end discrete GPUs, not just other integrated solutions. The 860M, by contrast, averages 26401, landing 0.1% behind the NVIDIA GeForce MX550, 0.3% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060, 0.6% behind the AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary, and 1.1% behind the NVIDIA RTX A4000. The 860M therefore sits in a mid-range integrated or entry-level discrete class.

Use-case separation follows directly from these numbers. The 8060S is suited for workloads that demand high sustained throughput, such as heavy 3D rendering, high-resolution gaming, or compute tasks that stress OpenCL and Vulkan pipelines. The 860M, with its far lower raw throughput, targets lighter workloads: everyday desktop graphics, casual gaming, and basic multimedia acceleration. The 8060S's 87th percentile ranking means it outperforms the vast majority of GPUs in the database, while the 860M's 72nd percentile indicates solid but not exceptional placement.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every compute resource metric. The 8060S uses 2560 shading units, 160 texture mapping units, and 64 raster operation pipelines. The 860M uses 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. That is a 5:1 ratio in shading units, a 5:1 ratio in TMUs, and a 4:1 ratio in ROPs. Ray tracing cores follow the same pattern: the 8060S has 40 RT cores, the 860M has 8.

Clock behavior diverges as well. The 8060S has a base clock of 1295 MHz and a boost clock of 2900 MHz. The 860M has a lower base of 600 MHz but a higher boost of 3000 MHz. Despite the higher boost on the 860M, the massive difference in execution resources means the 8060S maintains a commanding lead in throughput.

Fill rates and compute throughput reflect the resource disparity. The 8060S achieves a pixel rate of 185.6 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 464.0 GTexel/s. The 860M delivers 48.00 GPixel/s and 96.00 GTexel/s. Floating-point performance shows the same gap: the 8060S provides 14.85 TFLOPS for both FP32 and FP16 (1:1), while the 860M provides 3.072 TFLOPS for both.

Power envelopes differ substantially. The 8060S has a TDP of 55 W, while the 860M draws 15 W. Both are integrated graphics with no dedicated power connectors, but the 8060S consumes over three times the power budget. The bus interface also differs: the 8060S uses PCIe 5.0 x16, the 860M uses PCIe 4.0 x8. Both use system-shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth, so no memory capacity or bus width advantage exists for either.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs share the RDNA 3.5 architecture, the 4 nm TSMC process, and the same API support: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The differences lie in the chip designs and resource allocation. The 8060S is built on the Strix Halo chip with a die size of 308 mm². The 860M uses the Krackan Point chip, and its die size is not recorded in the database. Transistor counts are unknown for both.

The shading array differences translate directly to architecture utilization. The 8060S's 2560 shading units, 160 TMUs, and 64 ROPs give it a wide execution pipeline capable of handling large batches of parallel work. The 860M's 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs represent a much narrower implementation, appropriate for a low-power IGP. Ray tracing hardware scales accordingly: 40 RT cores on the 8060S versus 8 on the 860M, indicating the 8060S can sustain ray-traced workloads with far less performance degradation.

The 8060S has a die size of 308 mm², which is recorded for the Strix Halo chip; the Krackan Point die size is not listed. Both parts are IGPs with portable-device-dependent display outputs. The 860M's predecessor is the Navi II IGP, while the 8060S's predecessor is Polaris Mobile. Neither has a listed successor. The 8060S is in the Navi Mobile (RX 8000M) generation, while the 860M belongs to Navi III IGP (Strix Point Mobile), reflecting different product positioning within AMD's mobile lineup.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon 8060S has an average benchmark score of 55757, compared to 26401 for the AMD Radeon 860M, a difference of roughly 111%.

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in the Geekbench Vulkan test?

A: The 8060S scores 80483 in Geekbench Vulkan, while the 860M scores 30043. The 8060S leads by 167.9%.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two parts?

A: The 8060S has a TDP of 55 W, while the 860M has a TDP of 15 W.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The 8060S has 2560 shading units, while the 860M has 512, a 5:1 ratio.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same graphics APIs?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: How does the 8060S compare to the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 in average score?

A: The 8060S is 2.8% ahead of the RTX 4080 in average benchmark score.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records two direct head-to-head comparisons between the 8060S and the 860M. Both show overwhelming wins for the 8060S.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the 8060S scores 84626 against 22759 for the 860M. That is a delta of 271.8%, meaning the 8060S delivers nearly four times the OpenCL performance. This test stresses general-purpose compute through the OpenCL framework, and the 8060S's 5:1 advantage in shading units and texture units translates into a massive throughput lead. The 860M's higher boost clock of 3000 MHz cannot offset the resource deficit, as the 8060S still boosts to 2900 MHz while carrying five times the execution units.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the 8060S scores 80483 against 30043 for the 860M, a delta of 167.9%. The Vulkan test exercises graphics and compute workloads through the Vulkan API, and the 8060S again dominates, though by a smaller margin than in OpenCL. The 8060S's 40 RT cores and 64 ROPs likely contribute to its stronger Vulkan showing, as the test includes graphics pipeline elements that benefit from higher rasterization throughput.

The 8060S also appears in the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test with a score of 2162, a test not recorded for the 860M. This additional data point reinforces the 8060S's positioning as a high-performance part. Its average benchmark score of 55757 sits in the company of discrete GPUs: 0.1% above the RX 6750 GRE 12 GB, 0.6% below the RTX 5080, 1.7% above the Pro W5700X, and 2.8% above the RTX 4080. The 860M's average of 26401 places it within 1.1% of the RTX A4000 and 0.6% below the RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary, a much lower competitive tier.

The performance gap between the two parts is consistent across both shared benchmarks, with the 8060S leading by 271.8% in OpenCL and 167.9% in Vulkan. The 8060S also holds a 15-percentage-point advantage in the overall GPU percentile ranking, 87th versus 72nd. These numbers confirm that the 8060S is designed for demanding workloads, while the 860M targets efficiency and lighter tasks, a split visible across every recorded metric.