AMD Radeon 860M vs AMD Radeon RX 570 Comparison

The AMD Radeon RX 570 and AMD Radeon 860M represent two fundamentally different approaches to graphics processing: a dedicated, end-of-life discrete GPU from the Polaris generation versus a current, active integrated graphics processor (IGP) built on RDNA 3.5. Benchmark data shows a clear performance hierarchy between them. Across the two head-to-head compute tests, the RX 570 wins decisively in both, delivering a 41% higher score in Geekbench OpenCL and a 42.3% higher score in Geekbench Vulkan. The RX 570’s average benchmark score of 28,766 places it in the 74th percentile of all GPUs, while the 860M’s average of 26,401 sits in the 72nd percentile. Despite the 860M’s newer architecture and significantly higher boost clock, the raw execution resources and dedicated memory of the older discrete card prove superior in these workloads.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking result is the Geekbench Vulkan test, where the RX 570 scores 42,752 against the 860M’s 30,043. This 42.3% advantage is the largest margin in the dataset and highlights the RX 570’s strength in compute-heavy API workloads. The RX 570’s shading unit count of 2,048, compared to the 860M’s 512, provides a 4:1 ratio in raw shader hardware, which directly translates to this substantial lead in parallel processing tasks.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 570 again wins, scoring 32,084 versus 22,759 for the 860M — a 41% delta. This consistency across both compute APIs suggests the RX 570’s advantage is structural rather than API-specific. Interestingly, the 860M’s higher pixel rate (48.00 GPixel/s versus 39.81 GPixel/s) and much higher boost clock (3,000 MHz versus 1,244 MHz) do not compensate for its lower texture rate (96.00 GTexel/s versus 159.2 GTexel/s) and reduced memory bandwidth in these tests.

The RX 570’s nearest rivals in the overall database include the AMD Radeon RX 6800M (average score 28,874, delta -0.4%) and the AMD Radeon RX 470 (average score 28,996, delta -0.8%). The 860M, by contrast, sits near the NVIDIA GeForce MX550 (average score 26,421, delta -0.1%) and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 (average score 26,331, delta 0.3%). This places the two GPUs in different performance tiers despite their close percentile rankings. The RX 570 outperforms the 860M by roughly 2,365 points in average benchmark score, a gap that represents the difference between a mid-range discrete solution and a high-end integrated one.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gulf between these two GPUs is vast. The RX 570 uses the Polaris 20 chip built on GCN 4.0 architecture, manufactured on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It packs 5,700 million transistors into a 232 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 24.6M per mm². The 860M, conversely, uses the Krackan Point chip on RDNA 3.5 architecture, fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC. Its transistor count and die size are listed as unknown, but the process node advantage is clear: 4 nm versus 14 nm represents a massive reduction in feature size.

Memory configuration differs fundamentally. The RX 570 has 4 GB of dedicated GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The 860M uses system shared memory, with a bus width and bandwidth described as "System Shared" and "System Dependent" respectively. This means the 860M’s memory performance is contingent on the host system’s RAM configuration, whereas the RX 570 has guaranteed, fixed bandwidth. The RX 570’s memory clock is 1,750 MHz (7 Gbps effective), while the 860M’s memory clock is simply "System Shared."

The compute resources tell a story of trade-offs. The RX 570 has 128 texture mapping units (TMUs) and 32 raster operations pipelines (ROPs), versus 32 TMUs and 16 ROPs for the 860M. However, the 860M introduces 8 ray tracing cores, a feature entirely absent from the RX 570. Shader throughput favors the RX 570: 5.095 TFLOPS FP32 versus 3.072 TFLOPS for the 860M. Both GPUs offer 1:1 FP16 to FP32 ratios, indicating no dedicated half-precision acceleration.

Power and physical characteristics are starkly different. The RX 570 has a 150 W TDP, requires a dual-slot cooler, a 1x 6-pin power connector, and a 450 W suggested PSU. It measures 241 mm (9.5 inches) in length. The 860M, as an IGP, has a 15 W TDP, no power connectors, no slot width (listed as "IGP"), and no dimensions — it is designed to be soldered onto a motherboard. The RX 570 uses PCIe 3.0 x16, while the 860M uses PCIe 4.0 x8, a newer but narrower interface.

API support shows the 860M’s modern pedigree. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, while the RX 570 supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3. Both support OpenGL 4.6. The 860M also has a much higher boost clock at 3,000 MHz versus 1,244 MHz, and a higher base clock at 600 MHz versus 1,168 MHz — the RX 570 actually has a higher base clock, but the 860M’s boost is more than double.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 570 wins decisively in pure compute throughput. Its 5.095 TFLOPS FP32 performance, 159.2 GTexel/s texture rate, and 224.0 GB/s memory bandwidth make it the superior choice for GPU-accelerated workloads that leverage raw parallel processing. The benchmark data confirms this: it wins both head-to-head tests with margins exceeding 40%. For users running OpenCL or Vulkan compute tasks — such as rendering, physics simulations, or machine learning inference — the RX 570’s dedicated memory and higher shader count provide a substantial advantage.

The 860M wins in efficiency and portability. Its 15 W TDP is one-tenth of the RX 570’s 150 W, making it suitable for thin-and-light laptops where power draw and thermals are paramount. The 860M’s 8 ray tracing cores give it hardware-accelerated ray tracing capability, a feature the RX 570 lacks entirely. For modern games that leverage DirectX 12 Ultimate features like ray tracing, the 860M has a functional advantage despite its lower raw compute. Its 48.00 GPixel/s pixel rate is also higher than the RX 570’s 39.81 GPixel/s, suggesting better fill-rate-bound performance in certain rasterization scenarios.

The 860M’s active production status and 2025-02-28 release date mean it benefits from ongoing driver optimization and modern API support. Its Vulkan 1.4 support is a generation ahead of the RX 570’s Vulkan 1.3. The RX 570, being end-of-life since its 2017-04-17 release, receives no new feature updates. For users needing PCIe 4.0 connectivity, the 860M’s x8 interface may actually outperform the RX 570’s PCIe 3.0 x16 in bandwidth-constrained scenarios, despite the narrower lane count.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 570 has an average benchmark score of 28,766, which is higher than the AMD Radeon 860M’s 26,401. This places the RX 570 in the 74th percentile of all GPUs, versus the 860M’s 72nd percentile.

Q: What is the difference in Geekbench Vulkan performance?

A: The RX 570 scores 42,752 in Geekbench Vulkan, while the 860M scores 30,043. This represents a 42.3% advantage for the RX 570, the largest performance gap in the head-to-head dataset.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon 860M support ray tracing?

A: Yes, the 860M includes 8 ray tracing cores, a feature absent from the RX 570. The 860M also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the RX 570 is limited to DirectX 12 (12_0).

Q: How do the power requirements compare between the two?

A: The RX 570 has a 150 W TDP, requires a dual-slot cooler, a 1x 6-pin power connector, and a 450 W suggested PSU. The 860M has a 15 W TDP, no power connectors, and is an integrated GPU with no separate slot requirement.

Q: What are the memory specifications for each GPU?

A: The RX 570 has 4 GB of dedicated GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus with 224.0 GB/s bandwidth. The 860M uses system shared memory, with bandwidth described as "System Dependent" on the host configuration.

Q: Which GPU has a higher boost clock?

A: The 860M has a boost clock of 3,000 MHz, which is significantly higher than the RX 570’s 1,244 MHz boost clock. However, the RX 570’s base clock of 1,168 MHz is nearly double the 860M’s 600 MHz base clock.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear split between legacy discrete performance and modern integrated efficiency. The AMD Radeon RX 570 is the unequivocal winner in compute benchmarks, demonstrating a 41% lead in OpenCL and a 42.3% lead in Vulkan over the 860M. Its 5.095 TFLOPS FP32 throughput, 159.2 GTexel/s texture rate, and dedicated 224.0 GB/s memory bandwidth make it the superior choice for any workload that stresses raw parallel processing. Users with existing PCIe 3.0 systems who need maximum compute performance from a 150 W budget should choose the RX 570, particularly given its end-of-life status makes it available in the secondary market.

The AMD Radeon 860M, however, is the correct choice for modern, power-constrained systems. Its 15 W TDP, absence of external power connectors, and IGP form factor make it ideal for ultraportable laptops where the RX 570 cannot physically fit. The 860M’s 8 ray tracing cores and DirectX 12 Ultimate support provide features the RX 570 cannot offer, making it better suited for modern games that utilize ray tracing. Its 3,000 MHz boost clock and 48.00 GPixel/s pixel rate also indicate strong performance in fill-rate-bound scenarios.

The benchmark data shows the 860M is not without merit — its average score of 26,401 puts it within 8.2% of the RX 570’s 28,766, despite using shared system memory and having only a quarter of the shading units. This efficiency reflects the RDNA 3.5 architecture’s per-clock improvements over GCN 4.0. For users who prioritize portability, modern API support, and ray tracing capability, the 860M is the logical selection. For users who prioritize raw compute throughput and have the physical space and power budget for a dual-slot card, the RX 570 remains the stronger performer in every measured benchmark. The choice ultimately hinges on whether the 40% compute advantage of the RX 570 outweighs the 90% power reduction and modern feature set of the 860M.