AMD Radeon 860M vs AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT Comparison

The AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT and the AMD Radeon 860M represent two very different approaches to graphics processing: one is a dedicated, high-power add-in board from the Radeon RX 6000 series, while the other is a low-power integrated graphics processor (IGP) from the newer Navi III generation. The data shows a stark performance disparity, but the 860M's existence in a different power class makes it a compelling option for entirely different use cases. This analysis will break down their benchmark results, architectural differences, and the specific scenarios where each component holds an advantage.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The direct comparison data between these two GPUs is limited to two benchmark tests, yet the results are decisive. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the RX 6700 XT scores 44,152, while the Radeon 860M scores 22,759. This gives the RX 6700 XT a 94% advantage, nearly doubling the 860M's compute output in this API. The disparity becomes even more pronounced in the Geekbench Vulkan test, where the RX 6700 XT posts a score of 93,500 compared to the 860M's 30,043. This represents a 211.2% lead for the dedicated card, meaning it delivers more than three times the Vulkan performance of the integrated solution. The RX 6700 XT wins both head-to-head tests, while the 860M wins none.

These results are consistent with their respective positions in the broader market. The RX 6700 XT holds an average benchmark score of 27,425, placing it in the 72nd percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Mobile, which scores 27,435, a negligible 0% difference. It also sits close to the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090, which scores 27,565 (-0.5% delta), and the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 20, which scores 27,839 (-1.5% delta). This places the RX 6700 XT in a performance tier alongside high-end desktop and mobile discrete graphics solutions.

The Radeon 860M, despite its much lower raw scores, also achieves a 72nd percentile ranking with an average benchmark score of 26,401. Its closest competitor is the NVIDIA GeForce MX550, which scores 26,421, a -0.1% delta. It is also comparable to the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 (26,331, +0.3% delta) and the AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary (26,553, -0.6% delta). This suggests that while the 860M is vastly slower than the RX 6700 XT in absolute terms, its performance is remarkably well-tuned for its power envelope, placing it in a competitive position against other low-power and mobile graphics solutions.

The individual benchmark scores further illustrate the RX 6700 XT's strengths. In Passmark's G3D test, it scores 19,786, and in GPU Compute, it scores 9,336. Its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 2,435. The 860M lacks these specific benchmarks in the data, making a direct comparison in these workloads impossible, but the Geekbench results alone are sufficient to establish the performance hierarchy.

The Verdict

From the data, the verdict is clear for users seeking maximum performance: the AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT is the overwhelming choice. Its 211.2% lead in Vulkan and 94% lead in OpenCL demonstrate a level of raw graphics horsepower that the 860M cannot approach. This card is designed for demanding gaming and content creation, evidenced by its 72nd percentile ranking and its proximity to the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090. Users who prioritize frame rates and high-fidelity graphics should select the RX 6700 XT without hesitation.

Conversely, the Radeon 860M is the appropriate choice for a completely different set of priorities. Its key specification is its 15 W TDP, which is a fraction of the RX 6700 XT's 230 W. This makes it suitable for thin-and-light laptops where power efficiency is paramount. The 860M's performance, while far below the discrete card, is still competitive with other low-power options like the NVIDIA GeForce MX550. For users who need a capable integrated GPU for everyday tasks, light gaming, and media consumption without the need for a dedicated power-hungry component, the 860M is the logical selection. The data does not suggest it is a substitute for a high-end discrete GPU, but rather a highly efficient solution for portable devices.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is as wide as the performance gap. The RX 6700 XT is built on the RDNA 2.0 architecture using TSMC's 7 nm process node. It features the Navi 22 chip, which contains 17,200 million transistors on a 335 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 51.3M / mm². In contrast, the Radeon 860M uses the newer RDNA 3.5 architecture on a more advanced 4 nm process node from TSMC. Its chip is named "Krackan Point," and while its transistor count and die size are listed as unknown, the smaller process node is a clear indicator of its focus on efficiency.

These architectural differences translate into vastly different compute resources. The RX 6700 XT is equipped with 2,560 shading units, 160 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 64 render output units (ROPs). It also has 40 ray tracing cores. The 860M, by comparison, has only 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, along with 8 ray tracing cores. This means the RX 6700 XT has five times the shading units and four times the ROPs of the 860M. The raw compute figures reflect this: the RX 6700 XT delivers 13.21 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the 860M delivers 3.072 TFLOPS. Interestingly, their FP16 performance differs in ratio; the RX 6700 XT achieves 26.43 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio, while the 860M achieves 3.072 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio.

Memory architecture also differs fundamentally. The RX 6700 XT has a dedicated 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 384.0 GB/s. The 860M relies on System Shared memory, with its bus width and bandwidth being "System Dependent." This means the 860M's performance is heavily influenced by the system's RAM speed and configuration, a common trait for integrated GPUs. The clock speeds also tell a story: the RX 6700 XT has a base clock of 2321 MHz and a boost clock of 2581 MHz, while the 860M has a much lower base clock of 600 MHz but a higher boost clock of 3000 MHz, reflecting its ability to ramp up when needed but stay cool and efficient at idle.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT has a higher average benchmark score of 27,425, compared to the AMD Radeon 860M's average score of 26,401.

Q: How much faster is the RX 6700 XT in the Geekbench Vulkan test?

A: The RX 6700 XT scores 93,500 in Geekbench Vulkan, which is 211.2% higher than the Radeon 860M's score of 30,043.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two GPUs?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT has a TDP of 230 W, while the AMD Radeon 860M has a TDP of just 15 W.

Q: Which GPU supports the DirectX 12 Ultimate API?

A: Both the AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT and the AMD Radeon 860M support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2).

Q: What is the process node for each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT is built on a 7 nm process, while the AMD Radeon 860M is built on a more advanced 4 nm process.

Q: How do their nearest rivals compare?

A: The RX 6700 XT's nearest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Mobile with a 0% delta, while the 860M's nearest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce MX550 with a -0.1% delta.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT wins in every scenario that demands raw performance. Its data shows a decisive victory in both OpenCL and Vulkan benchmarks, with leads of 94% and 211.2% respectively. This makes it the clear winner for high-end gaming at demanding resolutions, 3D rendering, video editing, and any GPU-accelerated compute workload. Its 12 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory and 384.0 GB/s bandwidth provide ample headroom for large textures and complex scenes. The card's 72nd percentile ranking, alongside rivals like the RTX 3090, underscores its position as a high-performance part.

The AMD Radeon 860M wins on efficiency and integration. Its 15 W TDP is a fraction of the 230 W consumed by the RX 6700 XT, making it the only viable option for fanless or low-power portable devices. While its absolute performance is lower, its average benchmark score of 26,401 is still competitive with discrete low-end GPUs like the NVIDIA GeForce MX550. This makes it a winner for everyday productivity, 4K video playback, light photo editing, and casual gaming at lower settings. The 860M's advantage is not in speed, but in its ability to provide a "good enough" experience in a package that requires no extra power connectors and produces minimal heat.

Specification Differences

The following specifications differ between the AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT and the AMD Radeon 860M:

• Architecture: RDNA 2.0 vs RDNA 3.5
• Process Node: 7 nm vs 4 nm
• Chip: Navi 22 vs Krackan Point
• Transistors: 17,200 million vs unknown
• Die Size: 335 mm² vs unknown
• Base Clock: 2321 MHz vs 600 MHz
• Boost Clock: 2581 MHz vs 3000 MHz
• Memory: 12 GB GDDR6 vs System Shared
• Memory Bus Width: 192 bit vs System Shared
• Memory Bandwidth: 384.0 GB/s vs System Dependent
• Shading Units: 2560 vs 512
• TMUs: 160 vs 32
• ROPs: 64 vs 16
• RT Cores: 40 vs 8
• Pixel Rate: 165.2 GPixel/s vs 48.00 GPixel/s
• Texture Rate: 413.0 GTexel/s vs 96.00 GTexel/s
• FP32 Performance: 13.21 TFLOPS vs 3.072 TFLOPS
• FP16 Performance: 26.43 TFLOPS (2:1) vs 3.072 TFLOPS (1:1)
• TDP: 230 W vs 15 W
• Slot Width: Dual-slot vs IGP
• Power Connectors: 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin vs None
• Suggested PSU: 550 W vs null
• Bus Interface: PCIe 4.0 x16 vs PCIe 4.0 x8
• Production Status: End-of-life vs Active
• Release Date: 2021-03-02 vs 2025-02-28
• Launch MSRP: 479 USD vs null