AMD Radeon 860M vs AMD Radeon PRO W7700 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data leaves no ambiguity about the performance hierarchy between these two AMD parts. In every benchmark test captured in the database, the AMD Radeon PRO W7700 delivers a decisive victory, often by a substantial margin. The head-to-head comparison includes two tests: Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan. In the OpenCL workload, the Radeon PRO W7700 scored 108,245 against the Radeon 860M’s 22,759, resulting in a delta of -79% for the integrated part. That figure represents a massive gulf, with the discrete PRO card achieving roughly 4.8 times the score of the IGP. The Vulkan test tells a similar story: the PRO W7700 hit 129,706 while the 860M managed 30,043, a delta of -76.8%. Here, the PRO card is about 4.3 times faster. Across both tests, the PRO W7700 claims all two wins in the head-to-head set, while the 860M records zero.

Context from the nearest rivals list reinforces how far apart these two sit in the overall GPU landscape. The Radeon 860M’s average benchmark score is 26,401, placing it at the 72nd percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce MX550, averages 26,421, a delta of just -0.1%, indicating the 860M is essentially performance-equivalent to that entry-level mobile discrete GPU. The Radeon PRO W7700, by contrast, averages 118,976, sitting at the 95th percentile. Its closest competitor is the NVIDIA GB10 at 117,393, with the PRO card leading by 1.3%. The gap between the two AMD products in average score is roughly 92,575 points, a spread that spans from the upper-midrange of the database all the way to near the top. These numbers show the 860M is a competent integrated solution for everyday tasks, but the PRO W7700 operates in a different performance tier entirely, one populated by workstation and high-end server-class accelerators.

Architecture Differences

The architecture story starts with the process node. The Radeon 860M is built on TSMC’s 4 nm node, while the Radeon PRO W7700 uses the same foundry but on a 5 nm process. That node advantage for the IGP, however, does not translate into raw capability, as the two chips are designed for fundamentally different roles. The 860M is part of the Krackan Point chip, belonging to the Navi III IGP (Strix Point Mobile) generation, and uses the RDNA 3.5 architecture. The PRO W7700 is a Navi 32 chip, codenamed Wheat Nas, from the Radeon Pro Navi (Navi III Series) generation, built on RDNA 3.0. This means the PRO card runs the previous architecture iteration, yet its dedicated silicon dwarfs the integrated solution in nearly every physical resource.

Transistor counts reveal the scale of the difference. The PRO W7700 packs 28,100 million transistors on a 346 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 81.2 million per square millimeter. The 860M’s transistor count and die size are listed as unknown, but its role as an integrated processor suggests a much smaller allocation of silicon for the GPU portion. The PRO card’s dedicated die is a professional-grade component, while the 860M shares its package with CPU cores and other system functions. Clock behavior also diverges sharply. The 860M has a base clock of 600 MHz and a boost of 3000 MHz, while the PRO W7700 runs at a base of 1900 MHz and a boost of 2600 MHz. Although the IGP can reach a higher boost frequency, the PRO card’s much larger execution engine more than compensates.

Memory architecture is where the two parts diverge most fundamentally. The 860M uses System Shared memory, with its size, type, and bus width all listed as System Shared, and bandwidth described as System Dependent. This means the IGP borrows from the host system’s DDR memory, and performance scales with the platform’s RAM configuration. The PRO W7700, on the other hand, has 16 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 576.0 GB/s of bandwidth at an effective speed of 18 Gbps. That dedicated memory pool eliminates contention with the CPU and provides a massive throughput advantage. The PRO card’s memory clock is listed at 2250 MHz base, translating to the 18 Gbps effective figure. This memory subsystem alone explains a large portion of the benchmark gap, as bandwidth-hungry workloads like Vulkan rendering scale directly with memory throughput.

Compute resources further separate the two. The 860M has 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 16 raster output units (ROPs). The PRO W7700 has 3072 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. That is a 6x increase in shaders, a 6x increase in TMUs, and a 6x increase in ROPs. Ray tracing hardware follows suit: the 860M has 8 RT cores, while the PRO W7700 has 48. Neither part has tensor cores listed, but the PRO card’s raw throughput numbers are far higher. Pixel rate for the 860M is 48.00 GPixel/s, while the PRO W7700 reaches 249.6 GPixel/s. Texture rate is 96.00 GTexel/s versus 499.2 GTexel/s. Floating point performance shows the biggest gap: the 860M delivers 3.072 TFLOPS for both FP32 and FP16 (at a 1:1 ratio), while the PRO W7700 achieves 31.95 TFLOPS FP32 and 63.90 TFLOPS FP16 (at a 2:1 ratio). The PRO card is over 10 times faster in FP32 and over 20 times faster in FP16. This confirms the PRO W7700 is not just a larger chip, it is a purpose-built compute engine for professional rendering and simulation workloads.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7700 has an average benchmark score of 118,976, while the AMD Radeon 860M has an average score of 26,401. The PRO W7700 also sits at the 95th percentile of all GPUs, versus the 72nd percentile for the 860M.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference between the two?

A: The Radeon 860M uses System Shared memory with a System Dependent bandwidth, meaning it relies on the host system’s RAM. The Radeon PRO W7700 has 16 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, with a bandwidth of 576.0 GB/s and an effective speed of 18 Gbps.

Q: How do their compute unit counts compare?

A: The Radeon 860M has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The Radeon PRO W7700 has 3072 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. The PRO W7700 also has 48 RT cores versus 8 on the 860M.

Q: What is the FP32 performance of each GPU?

A: The Radeon 860M delivers 3.072 TFLOPS FP32, while the Radeon PRO W7700 delivers 31.95 TFLOPS FP32. This makes the PRO W7700 over 10 times faster in FP32 throughput.

Q: Which GPU has a higher boost clock?

A: The Radeon 860M has a boost clock of 3000 MHz, which is higher than the Radeon PRO W7700’s boost clock of 2600 MHz. However, the PRO W7700 compensates with a much larger execution engine and higher base clock of 1900 MHz versus 600 MHz.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The Radeon 860M has a TDP of 15 W and requires no power connectors, as it is an integrated GPU. The Radeon PRO W7700 has a TDP of 190 W, uses a single 8-pin power connector, and has a suggested PSU of 450 W.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon 860M | AMD Radeon PRO W7700 |

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

| Chip | Krackan Point | Navi 32 |

| Architecture | RDNA 3.5 | RDNA 3.0 |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 5 nm |

| Transistors | unknown | 28,100 million |

| Die Size | unknown | 346 mm² |

| Base Clock | 600 MHz | 1900 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 3000 MHz | 2600 MHz |

| Memory Size | System Shared | 16 GB |

| Memory Type | System Shared | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus Width | System Shared | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | System Dependent | 576.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 512 | 3072 |

| TMUs | 32 | 192 |

| ROPs | 16 | 96 |

| RT Cores | 8 | 48 |

| Pixel Rate | 48.00 GPixel/s | 249.6 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 96.00 GTexel/s | 499.2 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 3.072 TFLOPS | 31.95 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 3.072 TFLOPS (1:1) | 63.90 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 15 W | 190 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | 1x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | N/A | 450 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 4x DisplayPort 2.1 |

| Dimensions (Length) | N/A | 241 mm (9.5 inches) |

| Dimensions (Height) | N/A | 111 mm (4.4 inches) |

| Release Date | 2025-02-28 | 2023-11-12 |

| Launch MSRP | N/A | 999 USD |

The Verdict

The benchmark data indicates these two GPUs serve entirely separate markets with no meaningful overlap in performance. The Radeon 860M is an integrated processor designed for thin-and-light mobile devices, evidenced by its 15 W TDP, lack of power connectors, and System Shared memory. Its average score of 26,401 places it alongside entry-level discrete mobile GPUs like the NVIDIA GeForce MX550, which it trails by only 0.1%. The 860M’s strength is efficiency, not absolute performance. It can handle casual gaming and general productivity at a fraction of the power draw of any discrete solution.

The Radeon PRO W7700 is a professional workstation card, built around the Navi 32 chip with 28,100 million transistors on a 346 mm² die. Its 190 W TDP and dual-slot cooler are the price of admission for its 118,976 average score, which places it at the 95th percentile of all GPUs. It outperforms its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GB10, by 1.3%, and sits comfortably ahead of the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation by 1.6%. The PRO W7700 also carries a launch MSRP of 999 USD, reflecting its workstation positioning. The data shows that anyone needing serious compute throughput, especially in OpenCL or Vulkan workloads, should select the PRO W7700. Anyone constrained by power, space, or portability must accept the 860M’s far lower performance envelope.

Where Each One Wins

The Radeon 860M wins in scenarios defined by power efficiency and integration. Its 15 W TDP means it generates minimal heat and requires no external power, making it suitable for compact laptops and portable devices. The boost clock of 3000 MHz, higher than the PRO W7700’s 2600 MHz, helps it extract performance from its small execution engine. The 860M also uses the newer RDNA 3.5 architecture and a 4 nm process node, which provides a transistor-level advantage in efficiency. For users who need basic graphics acceleration, video playback, or light productivity without a discrete GPU, the 860M is the only viable choice between these two, as the PRO W7700 cannot physically fit into such a system.

The Radeon PRO W7700 wins in every performance benchmark recorded. Its 79% lead in OpenCL and 76.8% lead in Vulkan over the 860M are the headline numbers. The PRO W7700’s 16 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory with 576.0 GB/s bandwidth eliminates the System Dependent bottleneck that limits the 860M. The 6x advantage in shading units, TMUs, ROPs, and RT cores translates directly into its 31.95 TFLOPS FP32 and 63.90 TFLOPS FP16 throughput. The PRO W7700 also offers 4x DisplayPort 2.1 outputs, enabling multi-monitor professional setups, while the 860M’s display outputs are dependent on the portable device. The PRO W7700’s 95th percentile ranking and its position ahead of the NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile by 4.4% underscore its standing as a high-end workstation part. In any workload that stresses memory bandwidth, raytracing, or FP16 compute, the PRO W7700 is the decisive winner.