AMD Radeon 860M vs AMD Radeon RX 6550S Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score in the database?

A: The AMD Radeon 860M records an average benchmark score of 26,401, while the AMD Radeon RX 6550S has no recorded benchmark scores in the database.

Q: How does the Radeon 860M compare to its nearest rivals in average score?

A: The Radeon 860M sits 0.1% behind the NVIDIA GeForce MX550 (26,421), 0.3% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 (26,331), 0.6% behind the AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary (26,553), and 1.1% behind the NVIDIA RTX A4000 (26,683).

Q: What are the process node differences between these two GPUs?

A: The Radeon 860M uses a 4 nm process at TSMC, while the Radeon RX 6550S uses a 6 nm process at the same foundry.

Q: What is the memory configuration on the Radeon RX 6550S?

A: The Radeon RX 6550S features 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus with 128.0 GB/s bandwidth and a memory clock of 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective).

Q: What is the TDP rating for each GPU?

A: The Radeon 860M has a TDP of 15 W, while the Radeon RX 6550S has a TDP of 50 W.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units and ray tracing cores?

A: The Radeon RX 6550S has 1,024 shading units and 16 ray tracing cores, compared to 512 shading units and 8 ray tracing cores on the Radeon 860M.

Where Each One Wins

The Radeon 860M demonstrates its advantage in the integrated graphics space through its RDNA 3.5 architecture and higher boost clock. It reaches a boost frequency of 3000 MHz, which is 600 MHz higher than the Radeon RX 6550S's 2400 MHz boost. This clock advantage, combined with the newer 4 nm process node, allows the 860M to achieve competitive benchmark results despite having half the shading units of its discrete counterpart. The database shows the 860M at the 72nd percentile among all GPUs, placing it ahead of the RX 6550S, which sits at the 50th percentile.

The Radeon RX 6550S wins on raw compute throughput and memory bandwidth. Its 4.915 TFLOPS FP32 performance is 60% higher than the 860M's 3.072 TFLOPS. The discrete GPU also offers 128.0 GB/s of dedicated memory bandwidth, a 64-bit bus, and 4 GB of GDDR6 memory, whereas the 860M relies on system-shared memory with bandwidth described as system dependent. The RX 6550S also delivers higher pixel and texture rates: 76.80 GPixel/s versus 48.00 GPixel/s, and 153.6 GTexel/s versus 96.00 GTexel/s.

For systems where power draw is a primary constraint, the Radeon 860M wins decisively with its 15 W TDP versus the RX 6550S's 50 W TDP. The 860M also uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the RX 6550S uses PCIe 4.0 x4, giving the integrated part double the interface width. The 860M's newer RDNA 3.5 architecture and 4 nm process node indicate a more modern design, while the RX 6550S relies on the older RDNA 2.0 architecture on 6 nm.

Architecture Differences

The Radeon 860M is built on the RDNA 3.5 architecture and uses the Krackan Point chip, placing it in the Navi III IGP generation (Strix Point Mobile). The Radeon RX 6550S uses the older RDNA 2.0 architecture with the Navi 24 chip, belonging to the Navi Mobile generation within the RX 6000M series. This generational gap explains several fundamental design differences.

The manufacturing process differs substantially: the 860M uses TSMC's 4 nm node, while the RX 6550S uses TSMC's 6 nm node. The RX 6550S has publicly documented transistor counts and die size, with 5,400 million transistors on a 107 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 50.5 million transistors per square millimeter. The 860M's transistor count and die size are listed as unknown in the database.

Compute resource allocation differs significantly between the two. The RX 6550S doubles the 860M in shading units (1,024 versus 512), texture mapping units (64 versus 32), and render output units (32 versus 16). It also doubles the ray tracing core count, with 16 RT cores versus 8 on the 860M. Despite this doubling, the 860M's higher boost clock partially compensates in certain workloads.

The FP16 capabilities show a notable architectural divergence. The RX 6550S delivers 9.830 TFLOPS FP16, exactly double its FP32 rate, indicating a 2:1 ratio and dedicated half-precision throughput. The 860M delivers 3.072 TFLOPS FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with its FP32 performance, meaning it processes both formats at the same rate. This gives the RX 6550S a 3.2x advantage in half-precision workloads.

The 860M's RDNA 3.5 architecture represents a more recent design iteration, but the database shows both GPUs support the same API set: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Both are classified as IGP slot width with no power connectors and portable-device-dependent display outputs.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon 860M | AMD Radeon RX 6550S |

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

| Architecture | RDNA 3.5 | RDNA 2.0 |

| Chip | Krackan Point | Navi 24 |

| Generation | Navi III IGP (Strix Point Mobile) | Navi Mobile (RX 6000M) |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 6 nm |

| Transistors | Unknown | 5,400 million |

| Die Size | Unknown | 107 mm² |

| Transistor Density | Not listed | 50.5M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 600 MHz | 2000 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 3000 MHz | 2400 MHz |

| Game Clock | Not listed | 2170 MHz |

| Memory Size | System Shared | 4 GB |

| Memory Type | System Shared | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus Width | System Shared | 64 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | System Dependent | 128.0 GB/s |

| Memory Clock | System Shared | 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) |

| Shading Units | 512 | 1024 |

| TMUs | 32 | 64 |

| ROPs | 16 | 32 |

| RT Cores | 8 | 16 |

| Pixel Rate | 48.00 GPixel/s | 76.80 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 96.00 GTexel/s | 153.6 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 3.072 TFLOPS | 4.915 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 3.072 TFLOPS (1:1) | 9.830 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 15 W | 50 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | PCIe 4.0 x4 |

| Release Date | 2025-02-28 | 2023-01-03 |

| Predecessor | Navi II IGP | Polaris Mobile |

| Percentile vs All GPUs | 72 | 50 |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark comparisons between the Radeon 860M and the Radeon RX 6550S, and the RX 6550S has no individual benchmark scores recorded. However, the Radeon 860M has two recorded benchmark results: 22,759 in Geekbench OpenCL and 30,043 in Geekbench Vulkan. These scores average to 26,401, placing the 860M at the 72nd percentile among all GPUs.

The Radeon 860M's nearest rivals in the database provide context for its positioning. Its average score sits nearly identical to the NVIDIA GeForce MX550, trailing by just 0.1%. It edges ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 by 0.3%, a notable result given the RTX 5060 is a discrete desktop GPU. The 860M trails the AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary by 0.6% and the NVIDIA RTX A4000 by 1.1%.

The performance gap between the two AMD parts can be estimated from their theoretical specifications. The RX 6550S delivers 60% higher FP32 throughput (4.915 TFLOPS versus 3.072 TFLOPS) and 220% higher FP16 throughput (9.830 TFLOPS versus 3.072 TFLOPS). Its pixel rate is 60% higher and its texture rate is 60% higher. These figures indicate the RX 6550S should outperform the 860M in compute-heavy and fill-rate-limited workloads.

However, the 860M's architectural advantages should not be discounted. Its boost clock of 3000 MHz exceeds the RX 6550S's 2400 MHz by 25%, and its base clock of 600 MHz is significantly lower, suggesting a wider dynamic clock range. The 860M benefits from the newer RDNA 3.5 architecture and the 4 nm process node, which typically delivers better performance per watt. The 860M's 15 W TDP compared to the RX 6550S's 50 W TDP means the integrated GPU achieves its performance at a fraction of the power envelope, making it the more efficient option on paper.

The memory subsystem presents the clearest differentiation. The RX 6550S has dedicated 4 GB GDDR6 memory with 128.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the 860M uses system-shared memory with bandwidth described as system dependent. In scenarios where memory bandwidth is the limiting factor, the RX 6550S has a decisive advantage. In scenarios where power efficiency and modern architecture features matter more, the 860M holds the edge.

The percentile rankings reinforce this split: the 860M sits at the 72nd percentile versus the 50th percentile for the RX 6550S. This suggests that in the broader GPU landscape, the integrated 860M with its modern architecture and high clock speeds competes favorably against many discrete options, while the RX 6550S, despite its larger compute resources, ranks lower due to its older architecture and more limited feature set.