AMD Radeon 860M vs AMD Radeon PRO W7600 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive performance gap between the AMD Radeon 860M and the AMD Radeon PRO W7600. In both benchmark disciplines, the Radeon PRO W7600 delivers substantially higher scores, with the integrated 860M trailing by significant margins. The Geekbench OpenCL result favors the PRO W7600 by a delta of 72.1 percent, while the Vulkan test shows a 67.6 percent advantage for the discrete workstation card.

The AMD Radeon 860M produces a Geekbench OpenCL score of 22,759, while the AMD Radeon PRO W7600 reaches 81,528 in the same test. This represents a difference of 58,769 points, placing the PRO W7600 roughly 3.6 times higher in raw compute output. In Vulkan, the 860M scores 30,043 against the PRO W7600's 92,688, a gap of 62,645 points. The Vulkan result narrows the relative deficit slightly compared to OpenCL, but the PRO W7600 still holds a commanding lead in both APIs.

The average benchmark score across all recorded tests reinforces this pattern. The 860M averages 26,401 points, while the PRO W7600 averages 87,108 points. The percentile rankings place the 860M at the 72nd percentile among all GPUs in the database, whereas the PRO W7600 sits at the 93rd percentile. That 21 percentile point spread reflects a meaningful tier separation between an integrated graphics solution and a dedicated workstation GPU.

Examining the nearest rivals provides additional context. The 860M's average score of 26,401 sits within a narrow band of competing products. The NVIDIA GeForce MX550 averages 26,421, a delta of negative 0.1 percent relative to the 860M. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 averages 26,331, placing it 0.3 percent behind the 860M. The AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary averages 26,553, which is 0.6 percent ahead, and the NVIDIA RTX A4000 averages 26,683, 1.1 percent ahead. These figures indicate that the 860M competes closely with a cluster of mid-range discrete and older high-end cards, but none of these rivals approach the PRO W7600's output.

The PRO W7600's nearest rivals show a different competitive landscape. The NVIDIA Quadro GP100 averages 87,445, only 0.4 percent ahead of the PRO W7600's 87,108. The NVIDIA CMP 40HX averages 85,637, which is 1.7 percent behind. The NVIDIA RTX A4500 Mobile averages 91,134, a 4.4 percent lead, and the desktop NVIDIA RTX A4500 averages 91,671, a 5.0 percent lead. The PRO W7600 therefore slots into a performance tier occupied by high-end workstation and professional compute cards, with only single-digit percentage differences separating it from its closest competitors.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7600 has an average benchmark score of 87,108, compared to 26,401 for the AMD Radeon 860M.

Q: How large is the performance gap in the Geekbench OpenCL test?

A: The PRO W7600 scores 81,528 versus 22,759 for the 860M, a delta of negative 72.1 percent for the 860M.

Q: Does the 860M outperform any of its listed nearest rivals?

A: Yes. The 860M's average score of 26,401 is 0.3 percent ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060, which averages 26,331. It trails the other listed rivals by margins between 0.1 and 1.1 percent.

Q: What is the percentile ranking difference between the two cards?

A: The 860M ranks in the 72nd percentile among all GPUs in the database, while the PRO W7600 ranks in the 93rd percentile.

Q: Which card has a larger gap to its nearest rival?

A: The PRO W7600 has a wider spread. Its closest listed rival, the NVIDIA Quadro GP100, is 0.4 percent ahead, while the NVIDIA CMP 40HX is 1.7 percent behind. The 860M's closest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce MX550, is only 0.1 percent away.

Q: Are both benchmark tests won by the same GPU?

A: Yes. The PRO W7600 wins both the Geekbench OpenCL test and the Geekbench Vulkan test, with deltas of negative 72.1 percent and negative 67.6 percent respectively for the 860M.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon PRO W7600 wins in every recorded benchmark category. Its OpenCL score of 81,528 and Vulkan score of 92,688 both exceed the 860M's corresponding scores of 22,759 and 30,043. The PRO W7600's advantage is consistent across APIs, which suggests the performance lead is structural rather than workload-specific.

The AMD Radeon 860M has no recorded benchmark wins. Its competitive position is defined by proximity to discrete mobile GPUs like the NVIDIA GeForce MX550 and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060, with deltas of negative 0.1 percent and positive 0.3 percent respectively. In the database's percentile ranking, the 860M sits at the 72nd percentile, which places it above the majority of all GPUs but well below the PRO W7600's 93rd percentile.

For applications that rely on OpenCL compute, the PRO W7600 is the clear choice based on the 72.1 percent delta. For Vulkan-based workloads, the same conclusion holds with a 67.6 percent delta. The 860M's closest competitive reference points are the MX550 and RTX 5060, not the PRO W7600. The data indicates that the 860M serves a different performance class entirely, one closer to entry-level discrete graphics than to professional workstation cards.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ fundamentally in their memory architecture. The AMD Radeon 860M uses System Shared memory, with the memory type, bus width, and bandwidth all listed as System Shared or System Dependent. The AMD Radeon PRO W7600 uses 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128 bit bus, delivering 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth and a memory clock of 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective data rate.

Compute unit counts differ substantially. The 860M has 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, 16 render output units, and 8 ray tracing cores. The PRO W7600 has 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 32 ray tracing cores. Each of these figures is exactly four times higher on the PRO W7600, indicating a consistent scaling in the underlying execution resources.

Clock speeds follow an interesting pattern. The 860M has a base clock of 600 MHz and a boost clock of 3000 MHz. The PRO W7600 has a base clock of 1720 MHz and a boost clock of 2440 MHz. The 860M's higher boost clock does not compensate for its lower resource count, as the throughput figures show. The 860M delivers 48.00 GPixel/s pixel rate and 96.00 GTexel/s texture rate, while the PRO W7600 delivers 156.2 GPixel/s and 312.3 GTexel/s respectively.

Floating point performance also scales in the PRO W7600's favor. The 860M achieves 3.072 TFLOPS FP32 and 3.072 TFLOPS FP16 at a 1:1 ratio. The PRO W7600 achieves 19.99 TFLOPS FP32 and 39.98 TFLOPS FP16 at a 2:1 ratio. The PRO W7600's FP16 throughput is double its FP32 throughput, while the 860M runs both at the same rate.

Power and physical specifications separate the two products further. The 860M has a 15 W TDP, no power connectors, and an IGP slot width. The PRO W7600 has a 130 W TDP, a single 6-pin power connector, a suggested PSU of 300 W, and a single-slot form factor. The PRO W7600 measures 241 mm in length and 115 mm in height. The 860M lists no dimensions, consistent with its integrated nature.

Both cards use a PCIe 4.0 x8 bus interface. The PRO W7600 provides 4x DisplayPort 2.1 outputs, while the 860M's display outputs are listed as Portable Device Dependent. The two share the same API support: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Neither card has tensor cores listed in the database.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon 860M is built on the Krackan Point chip using RDNA 3.5 architecture, fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC. Its generation is listed as Navi III IGP (Strix Point Mobile), and its predecessor is Navi II IGP. The transistor count and die size are listed as unknown in the database.

The AMD Radeon PRO W7600 uses the Navi 33 chip under RDNA 3.0 architecture, with the codename Hotpink Bonefish. It is fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC, uses 13,300 million transistors on a 204 mm² die, and has a transistor density of 65.2 million per mm². Its generation is listed as Radeon Pro Navi (Navi III Series), and its predecessor is Radeon Pro Vega.

The process node difference is significant: 4 nm for the 860M versus 6 nm for the PRO W7600. The 860M's newer process allows for a much lower 15 W TDP, while the PRO W7600's larger, older-process chip consumes 130 W. The PRO W7600's die size of 204 mm² contrasts sharply with the 860M's unknown die size, but the 860M's integrated nature means it shares a package with other components in a portable device.

Architecturally, both use RDNA generations but differ in version: 3.5 for the 860M and 3.0 for the PRO W7600. The 860M's RDNA 3.5 update aligns with its mobile integrated positioning, while the PRO W7600's RDNA 3.0 serves a workstation discrete role. The ray tracing core counts of 8 versus 32 and the shading unit counts of 512 versus 2048 reflect the different silicon budgets available to each design.

The release dates place the 860M later: 2025-02-28 versus 2023-08-02 for the PRO W7600. Both remain in Active production status. The database lists no successor for either product. The 860M has no launch MSRP recorded, while the PRO W7600 has a launch MSRP of 599 USD.

The Verdict

The data directs a clear conclusion: the AMD Radeon PRO W7600 is the stronger GPU in every measured dimension. Its average benchmark score of 87,108 is more than three times the 860M's 26,401. The percentile rankings confirm the separation, with the PRO W7600 at the 93rd percentile versus the 860M at the 72nd percentile.

For workloads that stress OpenCL or Vulkan compute, the PRO W7600's 72.1 percent and 67.6 percent deltas respectively leave no ambiguity. The PRO W7600's 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 32 ray tracing cores provide four times the execution resources of the 860M. Its dedicated 8 GB GDDR6 memory with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth removes the memory sharing dependency that the 860M carries with its System Shared configuration.

The 860M's role is defined by its 15 W TDP and integrated form factor. It competes with discrete mobile GPUs in the same performance band, as shown by its near-identical average score to the NVIDIA GeForce MX550 and its slight 0.3 percent edge over the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060. For portable devices where power consumption is the primary constraint, the 860M delivers a 72nd percentile result without any power connectors or dedicated memory.

The PRO W7600 requires a 130 W power budget, a single 6-pin connector, and a 300 W suggested PSU, along with a single-slot physical footprint measuring 241 mm by 115 mm. These requirements are consistent with a workstation card designed for sustained professional compute. The 860M's 3000 MHz boost clock is the one specification where it exceeds the PRO W7600's 2440 MHz, but the throughput figures demonstrate that clock speed alone does not overcome the resource disparity.

The choice between these two GPUs depends entirely on the deployment context. The PRO W7600 is the appropriate selection for systems where maximum compute throughput, dedicated memory bandwidth, and professional display outputs are required. The 860M suits compact, low-power portable designs where its 72nd percentile performance is sufficient and its integrated nature eliminates discrete card installation. The database records no scenario in which the 860M outperforms the PRO W7600, and the 93rd percentile ranking of the PRO W7600 confirms its placement in a higher performance class.