AMD Radeon 860M vs AMD Radeon RX 470 Comparison

The AMD Radeon RX 470 and the AMD Radeon 860M serve entirely different purposes, yet the benchmark data shows a clear performance hierarchy. Based on the available head-to-head results, the RX 470 is the decisively faster GPU, winning both direct comparisons with substantial margins. The 860M, despite being a much newer integrated part with a higher boost clock, trails significantly in raw compute workloads, though its modern architecture and feature set offer advantages that pure score comparisons do not capture.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The data presents two direct benchmark comparisons between the RX 470 and the 860M, and in both instances, the discrete RX 470 emerges as the dominant performer. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the RX 470 scores 33,568 points against the 860M’s 22,759 points. This translates to a 47.5% advantage for the RX 470, a massive gap that underscores the difference between a dedicated graphics card with its own memory subsystem and an integrated processor sharing system resources.

The Vulkan results tell a similar story, albeit with a slightly narrower margin. The RX 470 achieves 39,884 points, while the 860M manages 30,043 points. The delta here is 32.8%, still a decisive win for the older discrete card. Notably, the RX 470’s Vulkan score is its strongest showing across all tested workloads, while the 860M’s Vulkan result represents its best performance in any benchmark as well. This suggests that while both GPUs scale well with modern APIs, the RX 470’s raw hardware resources—its 2,048 shading units versus the 860M’s 512—provide a fundamental throughput advantage that software optimizations cannot overcome.

It is importantly the RX 470 wins both head-to-head matchups, giving it a 2-0 record in this comparison. The win margins are not marginal; they are consistent, double-digit percentage leads that indicate a tier-level difference in computational power. For users prioritizing raw frame rates or compute throughput, the RX 470 is the clear choice based on these numbers alone.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 470 wins decisively in every measured benchmark category, but the nature of its victories points to specific use cases. Its OpenCL lead of 47.5% over the 860M indicates a significant advantage in general-purpose GPU computing tasks—think rendering, video encoding, or scientific workloads that leverage OpenCL. The Vulkan advantage of 32.8% is equally meaningful for gaming, as Vulkan is a low-overhead API used in many modern titles. If the workload is compute-heavy or gaming-oriented, the RX 470 is the superior option.

The 860M, while losing both benchmarks, is not without its own merits. Its integrated design means it draws only 15 W of power compared to the RX 470’s 120 W TDP, and it requires no power connectors or dedicated slot. This makes it the only viable option for thin-and-light laptops or compact systems where a discrete card cannot physically fit. The 860M also supports a newer DirectX 12 Ultimate feature set (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, whereas the RX 470 is limited to DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3. For users who need ray tracing or the latest graphics API features, the 860M is the only choice here, even if its raw scores are lower.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is generational and profound. The RX 470 is built on AMD’s GCN 4.0 architecture, fabricated on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries, with a die size of 232 mm² and a transistor count of 5,700 million. It is a discrete card from the Arctic Islands (RX 400) generation, designed for desktop performance. In contrast, the 860M uses the modern RDNA 3.5 architecture, manufactured on TSMC’s 4 nm node. It belongs to the Navi III IGP (Strix Point Mobile) generation, and while its die size and transistor count are listed as "unknown," the 4 nm process implies a far denser, more power-efficient design.

The core configurations differ dramatically. The RX 470 packs 2,048 shading units, 128 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 32 render output units (ROPs). The 860M has only 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. However, the 860M includes 8 ray tracing cores, a feature entirely absent from the RX 470. Clock speeds tell an interesting story: the RX 470 runs at a 926 MHz base and 1206 MHz boost, while the 860M has a much lower 600 MHz base but a 3000 MHz boost clock. This high boost allows the 860M to achieve a pixel rate of 48.00 GPixel/s, which actually exceeds the RX 470’s 38.59 GPixel/s, despite having half the ROPs.

Memory is another fundamental split. The RX 470 uses 4 GB of dedicated GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus, providing 211.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The 860M relies on system shared memory, with its bandwidth listed as "System Dependent." This means the 860M’s performance is heavily influenced by the system’s RAM speed and configuration, while the RX 470 has predictable, constant memory performance. The RX 470’s FP32 compute is 4.940 TFLOPS versus the 860M’s 3.072 TFLOPS, a 60% advantage for the older card. Both have a 1:1 FP16 ratio.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The RX 470 has an average benchmark score of 28,996, while the 860M scores 26,401. The RX 470 is roughly 10% higher on average.

Q: Does the 860M support ray tracing?

A: Yes, the 860M includes 8 ray tracing cores and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). The RX 470 has no ray tracing cores and is limited to DirectX 12 (12_0).

Q: How does power consumption differ?

A: The RX 470 has a TDP of 120 W and requires a 1x 6-pin power connector, while the 860M has a TDP of 15 W and needs no power connectors.

Q: What memory does each GPU use?

A: The RX 470 has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus with 211.2 GB/s bandwidth. The 860M uses system shared memory with bandwidth dependent on the system.

Q: Which GPU is better for Vulkan gaming?

A: The RX 470 is significantly better, scoring 39,884 in Geekbench Vulkan versus the 860M’s 30,043, a 32.8% advantage.

Q: Are these GPUs from the same generation?

A: No, the RX 470 is from the Arctic Islands (RX 400) generation released in 2016, while the 860M is from the Navi III IGP (Strix Point Mobile) generation released in 2025.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon RX 470 | AMD Radeon 860M |

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

| Architecture | GCN 4.0 | RDNA 3.5 |

| Process Node | 14 nm | 4 nm |

| Foundry | GlobalFoundries | TSMC |

| Shading Units | 2048 | 512 |

| TMUs | 128 | 32 |

| ROPs | 32 | 16 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | None | 8 |

| Base Clock | 926 MHz | 600 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1206 MHz | 3000 MHz |

| Memory Size | 4 GB GDDR5 | System Shared |

| Memory Bus | 256 bit | System Shared |

| Memory Bandwidth | 211.2 GB/s | System Dependent |

| Pixel Rate | 38.59 GPixel/s | 48.00 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 154.4 GTexel/s | 96.00 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Compute | 4.940 TFLOPS | 3.072 TFLOPS |

| TDP | 120 W | 15 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | IGP |

| Power Connectors | 1x 6-pin | None |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x8 |

| DirectX Support | 12 (12_0) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |

| Vulkan Support | 1.3 | 1.4 |

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

| Release Date | 2016-08-03 | 2025-02-28 |

| Transistors | 5,700 million | Unknown |

| Die Size | 232 mm² | Unknown |

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the AMD Radeon RX 470 is the superior performer in every direct benchmark comparison. Its 47.5% OpenCL lead and 32.8% Vulkan lead over the 860M make it the right choice for anyone who needs maximum raw compute or gaming performance. The RX 470 also has a higher average benchmark score (28,996 vs. 26,401) and sits at the 74th percentile of all GPUs, compared to the 860M’s 72nd percentile. If the task is rendering, encoding, or playing games at higher settings, the RX 470 wins without contest.

However, the 860M is not without its own clear rationale. It is an active, current-generation integrated GPU with a 15 W TDP, making it suitable for portable devices where the RX 470’s dual-slot, 120 W design is physically impossible. The 860M’s 3000 MHz boost clock and 8 ray tracing cores provide modern features like DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4, which the RX 470 cannot offer. Its pixel rate is also higher (48.00 vs. 38.59 GPixel/s), which can benefit certain rasterization tasks. For a user building a new thin laptop or a low-power HTPC, the 860M is the appropriate choice, despite its lower scores. For everything else, the RX 470 remains the benchmark king, delivering 32.8% to 47.5% higher performance in head-to-head tests.