AMD Radeon 860M vs AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT Comparison

The AMD Radeon 860M and AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT represent two completely different philosophies in GPU design: a 15 W integrated processor that lives inside a mobile chip, versus a 250 W dual-slot discrete card built for desktop performance. The benchmark data shows they are much closer in average scores than their physical differences suggest, with the 860M averaging 26,401 points and the RX 6750 XT averaging 26,011 points. That 1.5% gap puts the integrated solution marginally ahead in the aggregate, but the two GPUs win in entirely different workloads. The 860M dominates in OpenCL compute, while the RX 6750 XT crushes it in Vulkan rendering. Your choice hinges entirely on whether you need raw compute throughput in a low-power package or sustained graphics performance from a dedicated card.

The Verdict

Pick the AMD Radeon 860M if you are building a thin-and-light portable system where power draw and space are the primary constraints. Its 15 W TDP means it requires no power connectors and occupies no slot width, making it a drop-in solution for compact laptops. The data shows it delivers a 39.1% higher OpenCL score than the RX 6750 XT, which is a massive margin for an iGPU. It also sits at the 72nd percentile of all GPUs, slightly above the RX 6750 XT's 71st percentile, and its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 and AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary—both far more power-hungry parts.

Pick the AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT if you need serious graphics rendering performance. Its Vulkan score of 98,089 is more than three times the 860M's 30,043, a 69.4% deficit for the integrated part. This is a dual-slot card with 12 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory, a 192-bit bus, and 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth—figures that the 860M cannot match since its memory is system-shared and dependent on the host platform. The RX 6750 XT also has a 250 W TDP, requiring a 600 W suggested PSU and a 6-pin plus 8-pin power connection. It is end-of-life, while the 860M is active, but its benchmark profile shows it is still competitive.

Where Each One Wins

The 860M wins decisively in OpenCL compute workloads. Its score of 22,759 versus 16,360 for the RX 6750 XT represents a 39.1% advantage, which is unusual given the RX 6750 XT has 5 times the shading units (2,560 vs 512) and over 4 times the FP32 throughput (13.31 TFLOPS vs 3.072 TFLOPS). The 860M's RDNA 3.5 architecture appears to be far more efficient per shader in this specific test. This suggests the 860M is better suited for compute-style tasks that leverage OpenCL, such as certain productivity or scientific applications.

The RX 6750 XT wins overwhelmingly in Vulkan graphics. Its 98,089 score dwarfs the 860M's 30,043, giving the discrete card a 69.4% lead. This is the metric that matters most for gaming and graphics-heavy applications. The RX 6750 XT also has a PassMark G3D score of 20,700 and a PassMark GPU Compute score of 9,550, which are not available for the 860M, indicating a broader benchmark footprint. For any workload that renders frames or uses Vulkan, the RX 6750 XT is the clear choice.

Architecture Differences

The 860M uses the Krackan Point chip with RDNA 3.5 architecture, built on TSMC's 4 nm process. It is part of the Navi III IGP generation for Strix Point Mobile. Its transistor count and die size are unknown, but the 4 nm node is a significant advantage in power efficiency. It has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, 16 ROPs, and 8 RT cores. Its FP16 performance is identical to FP32 at 3.072 TFLOPS, indicating a 1:1 ratio, which is unusual and suggests compute-focused design. The memory is entirely system-shared, with bandwidth described as "System Dependent."

The RX 6750 XT uses the Navi 22 chip with RDNA 2.0 architecture, built on TSMC's 7 nm process. It has 17,200 million transistors on a 335 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 51.3M per mm². It has 2,560 shading units, 160 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 40 RT cores—exactly five times the 860M's counts for each of those units. Its FP32 is 13.31 TFLOPS, and FP16 doubles to 26.62 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio. The memory subsystem is completely different: 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus with 432.0 GB/s bandwidth, versus the 860M's shared memory. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon 860M has an average benchmark score of 26,401, which is 1.5% higher than the AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT's 26,011. The 860M also holds a slightly better percentile rank at 72 versus 71 for the RX 6750 XT.

Q: How do they compare in OpenCL performance?

A: The 860M wins significantly in Geekbench OpenCL with a score of 22,759 versus 16,360 for the RX 6750 XT. That is a 39.1% advantage for the integrated part, which is remarkable given the RX 6750 XT's much larger shader count.

Q: Which GPU is better for Vulkan-based games?

A: The RX 6750 XT is far superior in Geekbench Vulkan, scoring 98,089 compared to the 860M's 30,043. The discrete card leads by 69.4%, making it the only sensible choice for Vulkan rendering workloads.

Q: What are the power requirements for each?

A: The 860M has a TDP of 15 W and requires no power connectors, making it suitable for portable devices. The RX 6750 XT has a TDP of 250 W, needs a 1x 6-pin plus 1x 8-pin power connector, and has a suggested PSU of 600 W.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference?

A: The 860M uses system-shared memory with bandwidth dependent on the host platform. The RX 6750 XT has 12 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus with 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU is currently in production?

A: The 860M is marked as Active in production status, while the RX 6750 XT is End-of-life. The RX 6750 XT was released on 2022-03-02 with a launch MSRP of 549 USD.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two GPUs have only two shared benchmark results, and each wins one. The OpenCL test is an upset: the 860M scores 22,759 against the RX 6750 XT's 16,360, a 39.1% victory for the integrated chip. This is the single largest margin in either direction and defies expectations based on raw specs alone. The RX 6750 XT has 2,560 shading units and 160 TMUs, while the 860M has just 512 and 32 respectively, yet the 860M still produces higher OpenCL results. This points to architectural efficiency in RDNA 3.5 over RDNA 2.0 for compute tasks, or possibly driver optimizations favoring the newer part.

The Vulkan test is a complete reversal. The RX 6750 XT scores 98,089, which is 69.4% higher than the 860M's 30,043. This is a massive gap that aligns with the hardware disparity—the discrete card has 5 times the shading units, 5 times the TMUs, 4 times the ROPs, and 5 times the RT cores. It also has dedicated GDDR6 memory with 432.0 GB/s bandwidth, whereas the 860M must rely on system memory. The Vulkan score reflects the RX 6750 XT's ability to feed its 2,560 shaders at high clock speeds (boost up to 2600 MHz) without memory bottlenecks. The 860M's boost clock of 3000 MHz is higher, but with only 512 shaders and shared memory, it cannot compete in this rendering workload.

Beyond the shared benchmarks, the RX 6750 XT has additional data points that paint a fuller picture. Its PassMark G3D score is 20,700, and its PassMark GPU Compute score is 9,550. The 860M lacks these scores entirely, so no direct comparison is possible. The RX 6750 XT also shows a Geekbench Metal score of 137,249, which is irrelevant on Windows but indicates strong cross-platform performance. The 860M's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce MX550 (deltaPct -0.1%) and the RTX 5060 (deltaPct 0.3%), while the RX 6750 XT's nearest rivals are older AMD workstation cards like the FirePro W7100 (deltaPct 0.6%) and the R9 M395X (deltaPct 0.5%).

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every measurable specification. The process node shows the 860M on TSMC's 4 nm process, while the RX 6750 XT uses the older 7 nm node. The transistor count is unknown for the 860M, but the RX 6750 XT has 17,200 million transistors on a 335 mm² die. Clock speeds differ substantially: the 860M has a base clock of 600 MHz and boost of 3000 MHz, while the RX 6750 XT has a base of 2150 MHz, boost of 2600 MHz, and a game clock of 2495 MHz. The memory clock is also listed for the RX 6750 XT at 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective.

The memory subsystem is the most dramatic difference. The 860M has system-shared memory of unspecified size and type, with a system-dependent bus width and bandwidth. The RX 6750 XT has 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus with 432.0 GB/s bandwidth. The compute units scale accordingly: 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs for the 860M, versus 2,560 shading units, 160 TMUs, and 64 ROPs for the RX 6750 XT. RT cores are 8 versus 40.

The power and physical specifications are equally divergent. The 860M has a 15 W TDP, IGP slot width, no power connectors, and no suggested PSU. The RX 6750 XT has a 250 W TDP, dual-slot width, 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin power connectors, and a 600 W suggested PSU. The RX 6750 XT measures 267 mm in length, 110 mm in height, and 40 mm in width, while the 860M has no listed dimensions. The bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x8 for the 860M and PCIe 4.0 x16 for the RX 6750 XT. Display outputs are portable-device dependent for the 860M, versus 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a for the RX 6750 XT. The release dates are 2025-02-28 for the 860M and 2022-03-02 for the RX 6750 XT, with the 860M having no launch MSRP and the RX 6750 XT having a launch MSRP of 549 USD.