AMD Radeon 8060S vs NVIDIA P102-100 Comparison

FAQ

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in raw compute performance?

A: The AMD Radeon 8060S delivers 14.85 TFLOPS FP32 and 14.85 TFLOPS FP16, while the NVIDIA P102-100 offers 10.77 TFLOPS FP32 and only 168.3 GFLOPS FP16 (1:64 ratio). The Radeon's FP16 throughput is effectively 88 times higher on paper, making it far more capable for workloads that use reduced precision.

Q: Which card has better benchmark scores in OpenCL and Vulkan?

A: The Radeon 8060S wins both head-to-head tests. In Geekbench OpenCL, it scores 84,626 versus 49,602 for the P102-100, a 41.4% advantage. In Geekbench Vulkan, the Radeon scores 80,483 versus 67,454, a 16.2% lead.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference?

A: The P102-100 has 5 GB of GDDR5X on a 320-bit bus with 440.3 GB/s bandwidth. The Radeon 8060S uses System Shared memory, meaning its capacity, bus width, and bandwidth are system-dependent rather than fixed.

Q: Are these cards comparable in power requirements?

A: No. The P102-100 has a 250 W TDP, requires dual 8-pin power connectors, and needs a 600 W suggested PSU. The Radeon 8060S is an integrated GPU (IGP) with a 55 W TDP, no power connectors, and no PSU recommendation.

Q: Which GPU supports ray tracing?

A: Only the Radeon 8060S has dedicated ray tracing cores (40 RT cores). The P102-100 has no RT cores listed. The Radeon also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the P102-100 only reaches DirectX 12 (12_1).

Q: What are the production statuses and release timelines?

A: The P102-100 is end-of-life, released in 2018 as part of NVIDIA's Mining GPUs generation. The Radeon 8060S is active, released in 2025 under AMD's Navi Mobile (RX 8000M) generation, and its predecessor is Polaris Mobile.

---

The Verdict

The data presents a clear generational divide. The Radeon 8060S wins both available benchmark comparisons decisively: 41.4% ahead in OpenCL and 16.2% ahead in Vulkan. It also offers modern architecture (RDNA 3.5), ray tracing support, and a 4 nm process node. The P102-100, by contrast, is a Pascal-era mining card with no display outputs, no RT cores, and a 16 nm process.

If you need a functional GPU for compute or gaming on a portable device, the Radeon 8060S is the only sensible choice. It is active, has display outputs (portable-device dependent), and outperforms the P102-100 in every benchmark recorded. The P102-100's "No outputs" designation makes it unsuitable for any visual workload, and its end-of-life status offers no upgrade path.

However, the P102-100 is not without merit in specific niches. Its 88th percentile ranking versus all GPUs is slightly higher than the Radeon's 87th, and its average benchmark score (58,528) exceeds the Radeon's (55,757). The P102-100 also has a higher transistor count (11,800 million versus unknown for the Radeon) and a larger die (471 mm² versus 308 mm²). For compute tasks that don't require display output and rely on OpenCL or Vulkan, the P102-100 could still serve as a secondary compute accelerator, provided you accept its higher power draw and legacy PCIe 1.0 x4 interface.

---

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two recorded head-to-head tests both favor the Radeon 8060S, but the margins differ substantially.

Geekbench OpenCL: The Radeon 8060S scores 84,626 against the P102-100's 49,602. That is a 41.4% delta in favor of the AMD part. This is the single biggest performance gap in the comparison. OpenCL workloads that stress raw throughput—physics simulations, rendering, or data processing—will see a massive improvement on the Radeon.

Geekbench Vulkan: The Radeon 8060S scores 80,483 versus 67,454 for the P102-100. The 16.2% delta is narrower but still decisive. Vulkan titles or compute shaders will run noticeably better on the Radeon, though the P102-100 holds its ground better here than in OpenCL.

The P102-100 has zero wins across the head-to-head set. Its best relative performance comes in Vulkan, where it trails by a smaller margin than in OpenCL. Notably, the P102-100's Vulkan score (67,454) is higher than its OpenCL score (49,602), suggesting its architecture handles Vulkan's lower-overhead model more efficiently. The Radeon shows the opposite pattern—OpenCL (84,626) beats Vulkan (80,483)—indicating its compute pipeline is particularly strong in OpenCL-style workloads.

---

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA P102-100 | AMD Radeon 8060S |

|---|---|---|

| Architecture | Pascal | RDNA 3.5 |

| Process Node | 16 nm | 4 nm |

| Die Size | 471 mm² | 308 mm² |

| Transistors | 11,800 million | Unknown |

| Base Clock | 1582 MHz | 1295 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1683 MHz | 2900 MHz |

| Memory | 5 GB GDDR5X | System Shared |

| Memory Bus | 320 bit | System Shared |

| Bandwidth | 440.3 GB/s | System Dependent |

| Shading Units | 3200 | 2560 |

| TMUs | 200 | 160 |

| ROPs | 80 | 64 |

| RT Cores | None | 40 |

| FP32 | 10.77 TFLOPS | 14.85 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 168.3 GFLOPS | 14.85 TFLOPS |

| TDP | 250 W | 55 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | IGP |

| Power Connectors | 2x 8-pin | None |

| Suggested PSU | 600 W | Not specified |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 1.0 x4 | PCIe 5.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | No outputs | Portable Device Dependent |

| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |

| Production Status | End-of-life | Active |

| Release Date | 2018-02-11 | 2025-01-05 |

The Radeon 8060S has a significantly higher boost clock (2900 MHz versus 1683 MHz), which contributes to its higher FP32 throughput despite having fewer shading units (2560 versus 3200). The P102-100 compensates with more TMUs (200 versus 160) and more ROPs (80 versus 64), yet it still loses on pixel rate (134.6 GPixel/s versus 185.6 GPixel/s) and texture rate (336.6 GTexel/s versus 464.0 GTexel/s).

---

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs represent completely different design philosophies separated by seven years of process technology evolution.

Process and Die: The P102-100 uses TSMC's 16 nm node with an 11,800 million transistor count on a 471 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 25.1M per mm². The Radeon 8060S uses TSMC's 4 nm node on a 308 mm² die, but its transistor count and density are not disclosed. The smaller die with a newer process explains the Radeon's dramatically lower 55 W TDP versus 250 W.

Compute Architecture: The P102-100 is built on Pascal, NVIDIA's 2016-era architecture. It has no RT cores and no tensor cores. Its FP16 performance (168.3 GFLOPS) is a mere 1:64 ratio of its FP32, meaning consumer-level half-precision work is severely handicapped. The Radeon 8060S uses RDNA 3.5, AMD's latest architecture, with a 1:1 FP16 to FP32 ratio (14.85 TFLOPS each), which is a massive advantage for AI inference, machine learning, and other reduced-precision workloads.

Ray Tracing: The Radeon 8060S includes 40 dedicated RT cores, enabling hardware-accelerated ray tracing. The P102-100 has no RT support whatsoever. This is a binary feature difference that cannot be overcome by driver updates or overclocking.

Memory Architecture: The P102-100 uses dedicated GDDR5X with a fixed 320-bit bus and 440.3 GB/s bandwidth. The Radeon 8060S uses System Shared memory, meaning it depends on the host system's RAM. This makes the Radeon's effective memory performance variable—system-dependent, as the fact pack states—whereas the P102-100's bandwidth is constant. For workloads that require predictable memory throughput, the P102-100's dedicated VRAM may be preferable.

Interface and Connectivity: The P102-100 uses PCIe 1.0 x4, a severely limited interface for a 2018 card, and has no display outputs. The Radeon 8060S uses PCIe 5.0 x16 and outputs to portable device displays. The PCIe generation gap (1.0 versus 5.0) is enormous and will bottleneck the P102-100 in any workload that requires host communication.

API Support: Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4. The DirectX support differs—the P102-100 is DirectX 12 (12_1) while the Radeon is DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), which includes features like ray tracing and mesh shaders.

---

Where Each One Wins

AMD Radeon 8060S wins in: Every benchmark recorded. It is 41.4% ahead in OpenCL and 16.2% ahead in Vulkan. It wins on FP32 compute (14.85 versus 10.77 TFLOPS), FP16 compute (14.85 versus 0.168 TFLOPS), pixel fill rate (185.6 versus 134.6 GPixel/s), and texture fill rate (464.0 versus 336.6 GTexel/s). It has ray tracing, a modern architecture, active production status, a 4 nm process, and a vastly lower power draw (55 W versus 250 W). For portable devices, gaming, or any workload needing display output, the Radeon is the only option.

NVIDIA P102-100 wins in: Specific hardware attributes. It has more shading units (3200 versus 2560), more TMUs (200 versus 160), more ROPs (80 versus 64), more transistors (11,800 million versus unknown), a larger die (471 mm² versus 308 mm²), dedicated GDDR5X memory with fixed 440.3 GB/s bandwidth, and a higher average benchmark score overall (58,528 versus 55,757). Its percentile ranking (88th) is one point higher than the Radeon's (87th). The P102-100 also has a higher base clock (1582 MHz versus 1295 MHz), though its boost clock is far lower (1683 MHz versus 2900 MHz).

Practical use-case split: Choose the Radeon 8060S for any visual task—gaming, rendering, ray tracing, or portable device integration. Its 55 W TDP makes it suitable for laptops or compact systems without discrete power connectors. Choose the P102-100 only if you need a compute-only accelerator with dedicated memory bandwidth and can work around its lack of display outputs, its 250 W power draw, and its PCIe 1.0 x4 bottleneck. The P102-100's higher average benchmark score suggests it can still hold its own in aggregate compute, but its complete absence of display output and end-of-life status severely limit its modern applicability.