AMD Radeon 860M vs AMD Radeon RX 6700S Comparison

AMD Radeon 860M vs AMD Radeon RX 6700S: the database records a clear split between a modern, low-power integrated GPU and a mature, higher-power discrete mobile part. The RX 6700S dominates in raw compute and graphics workloads, while the 860M offers a much lower thermal envelope and a newer architecture. The data shows a decisive performance gap, but the context of each product’s intended use case tells a more nuanced story.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most direct comparison in the database comes from two compute-oriented tests. In Geekbench OpenCL, the AMD Radeon RX 6700S scores 70,965 points, while the AMD Radeon 860M scores 22,759 points. This is a delta of -67.9% for the 860M, meaning the RX 6700S is roughly three times faster in this workload. The margin is substantial and reflects the fundamental differences in shading units, memory bandwidth, and power allocation between the two.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the RX 6700S again takes a commanding lead. It scores 76,150 points against the 860M’s 30,043 points, a delta of -60.5%. While the 860M’s newer RDNA 3.5 architecture helps close the gap slightly compared to the OpenCL result, the RX 6700S still remains more than 2.5 times faster. The Vulkan test often favors modern APIs and driver efficiency, so the 860M’s relative improvement here is notable, but it is not enough to challenge the discrete GPU.

Across both recorded head-to-head benchmarks, the RX 6700S wins 2 out of 2 tests. The 860M wins none. This is a one-sided comparison in terms of pure score. However, the average benchmark score across all recorded tests for each GPU tells a broader story. The 860M has an average benchmark score of 26,401, while the RX 6700S averages 22,154. This inversion happens because the RX 6700S’s dataset includes several lower-scoring DirectX and Passmark tests, while the 860M only has two high-scoring Geekbench entries. The RX 6700S also sits at the 67th percentile among all GPUs, while the 860M sits at the 72nd percentile, despite the 860M losing both head-to-head tests.

The RX 6700S also shows a wide range of results across its full benchmark suite. It scores 87 in Passmark DirectX 10, 134 in DirectX 11, 58 in DirectX 12, and 195 in DirectX 9. Its best Passmark result is 15,066 in G3D, and its compute score is 5,990. The Geekbench Metal result is 72,864, which is close to its OpenCL and Vulkan numbers. This suggests the RX 6700S is consistently strong across modern and legacy APIs, with the exception of the very low DirectX 12 score, which may reflect a specific driver or test condition.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 6700S wins decisively in every workload where raw graphics throughput matters. Its 7.168 TFLOPS FP32 performance, 224.0 GB/s memory bandwidth, and 8 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory make it suitable for high-resolution gaming, 3D rendering, and compute-heavy tasks. The data shows a 67.9% lead in OpenCL and a 60.5% lead in Vulkan over the 860M. These are the only two tests where both GPUs share a common benchmark, so the conclusion is straightforward: for any application that scales with GPU compute, the RX 6700S is the stronger part.

The 860M’s advantage is not measured in benchmark scores but in power and integration. It has a 15 W TDP compared to the RX 6700S’s 80 W TDP. This is a fivefold difference in thermal design power. The 860M is an integrated GPU on the Krackan Point chip, using RDNA 3.5 architecture on a 4 nm TSMC process. It shares system memory and requires no power connectors. The RX 6700S is a discrete-class mobile GPU with a 7 nm process, 11,060 million transistors, and a 237 mm² die. For thin-and-light laptops where battery life and thermals are priorities, the 860M is the only realistic option.

The RX 6700S also wins on memory architecture. It has 8 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory with a 128-bit bus and 224.0 GB/s bandwidth. The 860M uses system shared memory, with bandwidth listed as system dependent. In practice, the dedicated memory of the RX 6700S avoids the performance penalties of shared memory contention, especially in sustained workloads. The 860M’s memory performance will vary based on the host system’s RAM speed and configuration, which introduces a variable that the RX 6700S does not have.

The 860M does have a higher boost clock at 3,000 MHz versus the RX 6700S’s 2,000 MHz boost. This clock advantage helps the 860M achieve a competitive pixel rate of 48.00 GPixel/s and texture rate of 96.00 GTexel/s, but it cannot overcome the RX 6700S’s larger core count. The RX 6700S has 1,792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, while the 860M has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The RX 6700S also has 28 RT cores versus 8 on the 860M, which gives it a significant advantage in ray-traced workloads.

The Verdict

The benchmark data clearly favors the AMD Radeon RX 6700S for performance. It wins both head-to-head tests by margins of 67.9% and 60.5%. For users who prioritize frame rates, rendering speeds, or compute throughput, the RX 6700S is the superior choice. Its 8 GB of GDDR6 memory and 224.0 GB/s bandwidth provide a stable foundation for high-detail gaming and professional workloads. Its percentile ranking at 67th among all GPUs is lower than the 860M’s 72nd percentile, but this is a reflection of the broader benchmark suite, not the head-to-head results.

The 860M is not without merit. Its 15 W TDP makes it suitable for fanless or low-power designs, and its RDNA 3.5 architecture on a 4 nm node represents a newer generation. The 860M’s average benchmark score of 26,401 is higher than the RX 6700S’s 22,154, driven by its strong Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan results relative to the RX 6700S’s weaker DirectX and Passmark scores. However, this average is based on only two tests for the 860M, while the RX 6700S has eleven recorded benchmarks, so the comparison is not apples-to-apples.

The RX 6700S is an end-of-life product, released in early 2022, while the 860M is active and was released in 2025. This matters for driver support and new-feature adoption. The 860M supports the same DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 APIs as the RX 6700S, so there is no API-level disadvantage. The RX 6700S has a 2:1 FP16 ratio, delivering 14.34 TFLOPS of FP16 performance, while the 860M has a 1:1 ratio at 3.072 TFLOPS. For mixed-precision workloads, the RX 6700S is clearly ahead.

Who should pick which? The RX 6700S is for anyone who needs consistent, high-performance graphics in a mobile chassis, such as a gaming laptop or a mobile workstation. The 860M is for users who need a capable integrated GPU with minimal power draw, such as in an ultraportable laptop or a mini PC. The data does not support the 860M as a gaming alternative to the RX 6700S. The performance gap is too large.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in Geekbench Vulkan?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6700S scores 76,150 points, which is 60.5% higher than the AMD Radeon 860M’s 30,043 points.

Q: How much memory does the RX 6700S have?

A: The RX 6700S has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, with a bandwidth of 224.0 GB/s.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?

A: The 860M has a 15 W TDP, while the RX 6700S has an 80 W TDP.

Q: Does the 860M have dedicated memory?

A: No, the 860M uses system shared memory, with bandwidth that is system dependent.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The RX 6700S has 1,792 shading units, while the 860M has 512 shading units.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each?

A: The 860M has an average benchmark score of 26,401, while the RX 6700S has an average of 22,154.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations. The AMD Radeon 860M is based on RDNA 3.5, built on a 4 nm process at TSMC. It is part of the Navi III IGP generation, specifically designed for the Krackan Point chip. The AMD Radeon RX 6700S uses RDNA 2.0, built on a 7 nm process at TSMC, and belongs to the Navi Mobile generation within the Radeon RX 6000 series.

The RX 6700S has a transistor count of 11,060 million on a 237 mm² die, with a transistor density of 46.7M per mm². The 860M’s transistor count and die size are listed as unknown in the database. The RX 6700S has a base clock of 1,700 MHz, a boost clock of 2,000 MHz, and a game clock of 1,890 MHz. The 860M has a base clock of 600 MHz and a boost clock of 3,000 MHz. The higher boost clock on the 860M does not translate into higher performance due to its smaller core configuration.

Core counts differ significantly. The RX 6700S has 1,792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 64 render output units. It also has 28 ray tracing cores. The 860M has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, 16 ROPs, and 8 ray tracing cores. The RX 6700S produces a pixel rate of 128.0 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 224.0 GTexel/s, while the 860M produces 48.00 GPixel/s and 96.00 GTexel/s.

Memory architecture is another major difference. The RX 6700S uses dedicated 8 GB GDDR6 memory with a 128-bit bus and 224.0 GB/s bandwidth. The 860M uses system shared memory, with no dedicated VRAM. This makes the RX 6700S more predictable in performance, as it is not dependent on system RAM speed or capacity.

The RX 6700S has an FP32 performance of 7.168 TFLOPS and an FP16 performance of 14.34 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio. The 860M has an FP32 and FP16 performance of 3.072 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio. The RX 6700S’s FP16 advantage is particularly relevant for AI and compute workloads. Both GPUs support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, and both use a PCIe 4.0 x8 bus interface. The RX 6700S is marked as end-of-life, while the 860M is active. The RX 6700S’s predecessor is Polaris Mobile, while the 860M’s predecessor is Navi II IGP. Neither has a recorded successor.