AMD Radeon 860M vs AMD Radeon PRO W7800 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark results are decisively one-sided. The AMD Radeon PRO W7800 wins both recorded tests, and the margins are substantial. In Geekbench OpenCL, the PRO W7800 scores 154,366 against the Radeon 860M's 22,759, a delta of negative 85.3 percent for the integrated part. In Geekbench Vulkan, the PRO W7800 records 175,422 while the Radeon 860M scores 30,043, a delta of negative 82.9 percent. The data confirms a multi-generational gap in raw compute output between these two AMD offerings.

The Radeon 860M carries an average benchmark score of 26,401, which places it at the 72nd percentile among all GPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals are clustered tightly: the NVIDIA GeForce MX550 averages 26,421 (0.1 percent above), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 averages 26,331 (0.3 percent below), the AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary averages 26,553 (0.6 percent below), and the NVIDIA RTX A4000 averages 26,683 (1.1 percent below). This indicates the 860M sits in a dense performance band where single-digit percentage swings separate it from its direct competitors.

The Radeon PRO W7800, by contrast, averages 164,894 across all benchmark results, placing it at the 97th percentile. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA RTX A5500 at 165,217 (0.2 percent above), the NVIDIA RTX 4500 Ada Generation at 166,094 (0.7 percent above), the NVIDIA A100 PCIe 40 GB at 162,504 (1.5 percent below), and the AMD Radeon Pro W6900X at 168,574 (2.2 percent above). The PRO W7800's average score is roughly 6.2 times higher than the 860M's average, a ratio that the head-to-head deltas confirm.

Where Each One Wins

The Radeon 860M wins no recorded benchmark tests in this comparison. Its strengths lie elsewhere in the database context: it is an integrated graphics processor in the Krackan Point chip, built on RDNA 3.5 architecture at TSMC's 4 nm process. Its 15 W TDP positions it for portable devices, and its display outputs are described as portable device dependent. The 860M's shading unit count is 512, with 32 texture mapping units and 16 render output units. It includes 8 ray tracing cores and reaches a boost clock of 3000 MHz. Its pixel rate is 48.00 GPixel/s, texture rate is 96.00 GTexel/s, and FP32 throughput is 3.072 TFLOPS. FP16 runs at 3.072 TFLOPS in a 1:1 ratio. The bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x8, and memory is system shared with bandwidth labeled system dependent.

The Radeon PRO W7800 wins both head-to-head tests, and its lead is consistent across OpenCL and Vulkan. It uses the Navi 31 chip with RDNA 3.0 architecture, manufactured on TSMC's 5 nm process. The die measures 529 mm² and contains 57,700 million transistors, yielding a transistor density of 109.1M per mm². Its base clock is 1895 MHz with a boost of 2525 MHz. Memory runs at 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective speed. The card carries 32 GB of GDDR6 on a 256 bit bus, producing 576.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Shading units number 4480, TMUs 280, ROPs 128, and ray tracing cores 70. Pixel rate is 323.2 GPixel/s, texture rate is 707.0 GTexel/s, and FP32 reaches 45.25 TFLOPS. FP16 doubles to 90.50 TFLOPS in a 2:1 ratio. The board is dual-slot, draws 260 W, requires two 8-pin power connectors, and asks for a 600 W suggested power supply. Its dimensions are 280 mm length, 110 mm height, and 40 mm width. Display outputs include 3x DisplayPort 2.1 and 1x mini-DisplayPort 2.1.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear split. The AMD Radeon PRO W7800 is the dominant performer in every measured workload, with an 85.3 percent lead in OpenCL and an 82.9 percent lead in Vulkan. Its 97th percentile ranking versus the 860M's 72nd percentile reflects an entirely different performance class. The PRO W7800's 4480 shading units, 280 TMUs, 128 ROPs, and 70 ray tracing cores produce 45.25 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, roughly 14.7 times the 860M's 3.072 TFLOPS. Its 576.0 GB/s memory bandwidth versus system shared memory further explains the gulf in results.

The Radeon 860M serves a different role. Its 15 W TDP, integrated form factor, and portable device dependent outputs make it suitable for compact systems where the PRO W7800's dual-slot 260 W board cannot physically exist. The 860M's boost clock of 3000 MHz is higher than the PRO W7800's 2525 MHz boost, but the massive difference in execution resources overrides any clock advantage. The 860M's 72nd percentile shows it is a competitive integrated solution, but against a workstation card at the 97th percentile, the outcome is not close.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7800 averages 164,894, while the AMD Radeon 860M averages 26,401.

Q: How large is the performance gap in Geekbench Vulkan?

A: The PRO W7800 scores 175,422 compared to the 860M's 30,043, which is an 82.9 percent difference.

Q: What is the FP32 compute difference between the two?

A: The PRO W7800 delivers 45.25 TFLOPS, while the 860M delivers 3.072 TFLOPS.

Q: What memory configurations do they use?

A: The PRO W7800 has 32 GB of GDDR6 on a 256 bit bus with 576.0 GB/s bandwidth. The 860M uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth.

Q: What are their process nodes?

A: The 860M uses TSMC's 4 nm process, while the PRO W7800 uses TSMC's 5 nm process.

Q: How do their ray tracing cores compare?

A: The PRO W7800 has 70 ray tracing cores, while the 860M has 8.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different points in AMD's RDNA family. The Radeon 860M uses RDNA 3.5 architecture on the Krackan Point chip, classified in the database as Navi III IGP (Strix Point Mobile). The Radeon PRO W7800 uses RDNA 3.0 architecture on the Navi 31 chip with the codename Plum Bonito, classified as Radeon Pro Navi (Navi III Series). The generation labels differ: the 860M belongs to Navi III IGP (Strix Point Mobile), while the PRO W7800 belongs to Radeon Pro Navi (Navi III Series).

Process technology diverges. The 860M is built on TSMC's 4 nm node; the PRO W7800 uses TSMC's 5 nm node. The PRO W7800's die is 529 mm² with 57,700 million transistors, while the 860M's die size and transistor count are listed as unknown in the database. The PRO W7800's transistor density is recorded at 109.1M per mm².

Execution resources differ substantially. The 860M has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, 16 ROPs, and 8 ray tracing cores. The PRO W7800 has 4480 shading units, 280 TMUs, 128 ROPs, and 70 ray tracing cores. FP16 processing differs in ratio: the 860M runs FP16 at 1:1 with FP32 (3.072 TFLOPS each), while the PRO W7800 runs FP16 at 2:1 (90.50 TFLOPS versus 45.25 TFLOPS FP32).

The 860M's predecessor is listed as Navi II IGP, while the PRO W7800's predecessor is Radeon Pro Vega. Release dates also differ: the 860M launched on 2025-02-28, and the PRO W7800 launched on 2023-04-12. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Specification Differences

The Radeon 860M and Radeon PRO W7800 diverge across nearly every measurable specification. The 860M has a base clock of 600 MHz and a boost clock of 3000 MHz; the PRO W7800 has a base clock of 1895 MHz and a boost clock of 2525 MHz. Memory differs completely: the 860M uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth, while the PRO W7800 uses 32 GB of GDDR6 on a 256 bit bus with 576.0 GB/s bandwidth and 2250 MHz memory clock (18 Gbps effective).

Pixel and texture rates separate the pair. The 860M reaches 48.00 GPixel/s and 96.00 GTexel/s; the PRO W7800 reaches 323.2 GPixel/s and 707.0 GTexel/s. Power draw is another major divider: the 860M consumes 15 W and requires no power connectors, while the PRO W7800 consumes 260 W and needs two 8-pin connectors with a 600 W suggested power supply. The 860M is an IGP with no slot width, while the PRO W7800 is dual-slot.

Bus interfaces differ, with the 860M using PCIe 4.0 x8 and the PRO W7800 using PCIe 4.0 x16. Display outputs are not comparable: the 860M's outputs are portable device dependent, while the PRO W7800 offers 3x DisplayPort 2.1 and 1x mini-DisplayPort 2.1. Physical dimensions apply only to the PRO W7800, which measures 280 mm by 110 mm by 40 mm. The PRO W7800 has a launch MSRP of 2,499 USD. Both GPUs share the same DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan API support. The 860M's production status is Active, and the PRO W7800's production status is Active as well. The 860M's FP16 runs at 3.072 TFLOPS (1:1), and the PRO W7800's FP16 runs at 90.50 TFLOPS (2:1).