AMD Radeon 860M vs AMD Radeon R9 M395X Comparison

The AMD Radeon 860M and AMD Radeon R9 M395X represent two very different eras of mobile graphics, separated by a decade of architectural evolution. The 860M is a modern integrated graphics processor (IGP) built on TSMC's 4 nm process, while the R9 M395X is a legacy discrete mobile GPU from 2015 built on a 28 nm process. Benchmark data shows the 860M holds a decisive win in the only shared test, achieving a Geekbench OpenCL score of 22,759 against the R9 M395X's 17,829, a 27.7% advantage. Despite the R9 M395X having a higher peak score in its Metal benchmark, the 860M's average benchmark score of 26,401 edges out the R9 M395X's 25,891, placing both in similar percentile brackets (72nd and 71st, respectively). The data clearly favors the modern IGP for raw compute performance, but the older discrete card retains advantages in dedicated memory bandwidth and pixel throughput that matter in specific workloads.

The Verdict

The benchmark results are unambiguous: the AMD Radeon 860M is the superior performer in compute workloads. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 22,759 crushes the R9 M395X's 17,829, a 27.7% lead that is substantial for any comparison. This advantage is further reflected in the average benchmark score, where the 860M's 26,401 sits just above the R9 M395X's 25,891. For anyone choosing between these two based purely on performance data, the 860M is the clear pick.

However, the R9 M395X is not without its own merits. It offers 8 GB of dedicated GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 160.0 GB/s of bandwidth, whereas the 860M relies on system-shared memory with bandwidth that is "System Dependent." This makes the R9 M395X the better choice for applications that require large, fast local memory pools, even if its compute cores are slower. The R9 M395X also posts a strong Geekbench Metal score of 33,953, a test the 860M does not have a result for, suggesting it may hold an edge in Metal-optimized applications. Ultimately, the 860M wins on modern compute efficiency and raw OpenCL performance, while the R9 M395X wins on dedicated memory capacity and legacy API compatibility.

Where Each One Wins

The 860M dominates in modern, cross-platform compute workloads. Its 27.7% lead in Geekbench OpenCL demonstrates that its RDNA 3.5 architecture extracts far more performance from its 512 shading units than the R9 M395X's GCN 3.0 design does from its 2048 shading units. The 860M also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), Vulkan 1.4, and features 8 ray tracing cores, making it the only one of the two equipped for modern graphics features like hardware-accelerated ray tracing. Its 15 W TDP also makes it dramatically more power-efficient than the R9 M395X's 75 W TDP, a critical advantage in portable devices.

The R9 M395X wins in scenarios that benefit from its dedicated memory subsystem. With 8 GB of GDDR5 and 160.0 GB/s of bandwidth, it can handle large textures and data sets without competing with the system's main memory. Its higher pixel rate of 23.14 GPixel/s, while lower than the 860M's 48.00 GPixel/s, is paired with 32 ROPs, which can be advantageous in certain fill-rate-limited legacy games. It also has a distinct advantage in Metal-specific workloads, as evidenced by its 33,953 Geekbench Metal score, a benchmark absent from the 860M's data set. For older 32-bit applications or those optimized for GCN architecture, the R9 M395X's driver maturity and dedicated VRAM make it a viable, if aging, option.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is vast. The 860M is built on RDNA 3.5, a modern architecture manufactured on TSMC's 4 nm process, while the R9 M395X uses the older GCN 3.0 architecture on a 28 nm process. This process difference is stark: the 860M's transistor count and die size are listed as "unknown" but are likely far smaller and denser than the R9 M395X's 5,000 million transistors spread across a 366 mm² die with a density of 13.7M transistors per mm². The 860M's IGP nature means it shares system memory, while the R9 M395X's MXM Module form factor allows for dedicated GDDR5.

Core configs differ fundamentally. The 860M packs 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, while the R9 M395X has 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. Despite having a quarter of the shaders, the 860M achieves higher FP32 performance at 3.072 TFLOPS versus the R9 M395X's 2.961 TFLOPS. This is due to the 860M's much higher boost clock of 3000 MHz, compared to the R9 M395X's unspecified base and boost clocks. The 860M also features 8 ray tracing cores, a capability entirely absent from the R9 M395X. Feature support also diverges: the 860M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4, while the R9 M395X is limited to DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.2.170.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in OpenCL compute workloads?

A: The AMD Radeon 860M is significantly faster, scoring 22,759 in Geekbench OpenCL compared to the R9 M395X's 17,829, a 27.7% advantage.

Q: Does the R9 M395X have any performance advantage?

A: Yes, it has a dedicated 8 GB GDDR5 memory pool with 160.0 GB/s bandwidth, and it achieves a Geekbench Metal score of 33,953, which the 860M does not have a result for.

Q: What is the difference in power consumption?

A: The 860M has a 15 W TDP, while the R9 M395X has a 75 W TDP, making the 860M substantially more power-efficient.

Q: Which GPU supports modern graphics features like ray tracing?

A: Only the AMD Radeon 860M supports ray tracing, featuring 8 dedicated RT cores and DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) API support.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The 860M's average benchmark score is 26,401, which is 2% higher than the R9 M395X's 25,891.

Q: Which GPU is better for legacy or Metal-based applications?

A: The R9 M395X may be better suited for Metal-optimized apps, given its 33,953 Geekbench Metal score, and its dedicated VRAM can help in legacy scenarios that require large memory buffers.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only directly comparable benchmark in the data set is Geekbench OpenCL, and it delivers a decisive verdict. The AMD Radeon 860M scores 22,759, while the AMD Radeon R9 M395X scores 17,829. This yields a 27.7% delta in favor of the 860M, a margin that clearly demonstrates the modern architecture's superior compute efficiency. This is a massive win for an integrated GPU against a discrete one, highlighting how far IGP performance has come since 2015.

The R9 M395X's best showing comes in Geekbench Metal, where it scores 33,953. This is a higher raw score than the 860M's OpenCL result, but it is an apples-to-oranges comparison since the 860M has no Metal benchmark result. However, this number suggests that in Metal-optimized workflows, the R9 M395X can deliver strong performance, potentially exceeding what the 860M can achieve in similar scenarios. Yet, for cross-platform OpenCL tasks, the 860M's lead is insurmountable. The data also shows the R9 M395X's average score of 25,891 places it within 0.1% of the AMD FirePro W7100 and 0.6% of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Mobile, while the 860M's 26,401 average sits within 0.1% of the NVIDIA GeForce MX550 and 0.3% of the RTX 5060. These rival comparisons underscore that both GPUs are competitive in their respective eras, but the 860M's modern architecture gives it a clear edge in current benchmark suites.