AMD Radeon 860M vs AMD Radeon RX 7400 Comparison

FAQ

Q: How do the average benchmark scores compare between the AMD Radeon 860M and the AMD Radeon RX 7400?

A: The Radeon 860M has an average benchmark score of 26401, while the Radeon RX 7400 has an average benchmark score of 2467. This places the 860M far ahead in aggregate measured performance.

Q: What is the performance percentile ranking for each GPU?

A: The Radeon 860M ranks in the 72nd percentile among all GPUs, whereas the Radeon RX 7400 ranks in the 17th percentile. The 860M sits well above the majority of recorded GPUs, while the RX 7400 sits near the lower end.

Q: Which GPU has the higher boost clock?

A: The Radeon 860M has a boost clock of 3000 MHz, which is higher than the Radeon RX 7400's boost clock of 2300 MHz. However, the RX 7400 has a much higher base clock of 1452 MHz compared to the 860M's 600 MHz.

Q: What are the shading unit counts for each GPU?

A: The Radeon RX 7400 has 1792 shading units, while the Radeon 860M has 512 shading units. The RX 7400 also has 112 texture mapping units and 64 ROPs, compared to 32 TMUs and 16 ROPs on the 860M.

Q: How does memory configuration differ between the two?

A: The Radeon RX 7400 uses 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Radeon 860M uses system shared memory, with bandwidth described as system dependent.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The Radeon RX 7400 has a TDP of 43 W and requires a 1x 6-pin power connector with a suggested PSU of 200 W. The Radeon 860M has a TDP of 15 W and requires no power connectors.

The Verdict

The data strongly favors the AMD Radeon 860M in overall measured performance. Its average benchmark score of 26401 is more than ten times the RX 7400's score of 2467, and its 72nd percentile ranking versus the RX 7400's 17th percentile confirms a wide gap. The 860M's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce MX550 at 26421 (0.1% ahead), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 at 26331 (0.3% behind), and the AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary at 26553 (0.6% behind). These are established discrete GPUs, and the 860M sits right among them. The RX 7400, by contrast, is grouped with the AMD Radeon 8040S at 2440 (1.1% ahead), the NVIDIA GeForce 710M at 2433 (1.4% ahead), and the Intel HD Graphics 610 at 2425 (1.8% ahead), all of which are low-end or integrated-class parts.

For users choosing between these two, the 860M is the clear pick on raw benchmark results. It delivers scores comparable to mid-range discrete graphics cards while operating as an integrated GPU with a 15 W TDP. The RX 7400, despite being a discrete dual-slot card with a 43 W TDP, records scores that place it in the lower percentile range. The only scenario where the RX 7400 holds interest is one that requires its dedicated 8 GB GDDR6 memory and 288.0 GB/s bandwidth, since the 860M relies on system shared memory. On measured compute and graphics benchmarks, however, the 860M dominates.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two GPUs have no overlapping benchmark entries in the database, so a direct per-test comparison is not possible. The aggregate data, however, tells a decisive story. The Radeon 860M achieves an average benchmark score of 26401 across its recorded tests, which include Geekbench OpenCL at 22759 and Geekbench Vulkan at 30043. The Radeon RX 7400's recorded tests are entirely different: 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 at 1103, Passmark DirectX 10 at 59, Passmark DirectX 11 at 97, Passmark DirectX 12 at 44, Passmark DirectX 9 at 176, Passmark G2D at 1209, Passmark G3D at 11897, and Passmark GPU Compute at 5152. Its average across these is 2467.

The 860M's Vulkan score of 30043 alone exceeds the RX 7400's total average by more than a factor of twelve. The RX 7400's highest individual score, Passmark G3D at 11897, is still well below the 860M's Geekbench OpenCL score of 22759. In percentile terms, the 860M at 72nd place among all GPUs versus the RX 7400 at 17th place represents a chasm in relative standing. The 860M's nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce MX550, scores 26421, a delta of -0.1%, meaning the 860M is effectively tied with that discrete laptop GPU. The RX 7400's closest competitor, the AMD Radeon 8040S, scores 2440, a delta of 1.1%, meaning the RX 7400 is just barely ahead of that part. These deltas illustrate that the RX 7400 competes in a completely different performance tier.

Specification Differences

The Radeon 860M is an integrated graphics processor built for mobile platforms, while the Radeon RX 7400 is a discrete dual-slot card. The 860M has no power connectors and a 15 W TDP; the RX 7400 requires a 1x 6-pin connector, has a 43 W TDP, and a suggested PSU of 200 W. The 860M uses system shared memory with a system dependent bandwidth, whereas the RX 7400 has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus delivering 288.0 GB/s. The RX 7400 has a base clock of 1452 MHz and a game clock of 2200 MHz, while the 860M starts at 600 MHz. The 860M boosts higher at 3000 MHz versus 2300 MHz on the RX 7400. The RX 7400 has 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 28 ray tracing cores. The 860M has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, 16 ROPs, and 8 ray tracing cores. The RX 7400's pixel rate is 147.2 GPixel/s and texture rate is 257.6 GTexel/s, versus 48.00 GPixel/s and 96.00 GTexel/s on the 860M. FP32 compute is 16.49 TFLOPS on the RX 7400 versus 3.072 TFLOPS on the 860M. The RX 7400's FP16 is 32.97 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio; the 860M's FP16 is 3.072 TFLOPS at 1:1. The RX 7400 has a 6 nm process node, 13,300 million transistors, a 204 mm² die size, and a transistor density of 65.2M per mm². The 860M uses a 4 nm process node with transistor count and die size unknown. Display outputs differ: the RX 7400 offers 1x HDMI 2.1a and 3x DisplayPort 2.1, while the 860M's outputs are portable device dependent. Both use PCIe 4.0 x8, support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Architecture Differences

The Radeon 860M is built on the RDNA 3.5 architecture with the Krackan Point chip, part of the Navi III IGP generation for Strix Point Mobile. The Radeon RX 7400 uses RDNA 3.0 with the Navi 33 chip, codenamed Hotpink Bonefish, in the Radeon RX 7000 series. The process nodes differ: the 860M is fabricated on TSMC's 4 nm process, while the RX 7400 uses TSMC's 6 nm process. The RX 7400 has a known transistor count of 13,300 million and a die size of 204 mm², with a density of 65.2M transistors per mm². The 860M's transistor count and die size are not recorded in the database. The RX 7400 has significantly more execution resources: 1792 shading units and 28 ray tracing cores versus 512 shading units and 8 ray tracing cores on the 860M. The RX 7400 also has a dedicated 8 GB GDDR6 memory subsystem with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth, whereas the 860M shares system memory with bandwidth dependent on the host platform. The 860M has a higher boost clock of 3000 MHz, while the RX 7400's boost is 2300 MHz but with a much higher base clock of 1452 MHz. The RX 7400 supports FP16 at a 2:1 ratio for 32.97 TFLOPS, while the 860M runs FP16 at 1:1 for 3.072 TFLOPS. The RX 7400 is a dual-slot card requiring external power; the 860M is an IGP with no power connectors. The RX 7400's predecessor is Navi II and its successor is Navi IV, while the 860M's predecessor is Navi II IGP.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon 860M wins decisively on aggregate benchmark performance. Its average score of 26401 places it in the 72nd percentile, and its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce MX550, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060, and the AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary, all within 1.1% of its score. This makes it suitable for applications where raw compute and graphics throughput matter most, such as general 3D rendering tasks or GPU-accelerated workloads. Its 3000 MHz boost clock and 4 nm process node also point to strong efficiency per clock, and its 15 W TDP means it operates without any external power connection.

The AMD Radeon RX 7400 wins on memory capacity and bandwidth. It provides 8 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth on a 128-bit bus, which is a fixed resource independent of the host system. Its 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 64 ROPs give it substantially higher theoretical throughput rates: 16.49 TFLOPS FP32, 147.2 GPixel/s pixel rate, and 257.6 GTexel/s texture rate. It also has 28 ray tracing cores, more than triple the 860M's 8. In raw hardware specifications, the RX 7400 is the more powerful part on paper. Its benchmark results, however, do not reflect that advantage; its average score of 2467 and 17th percentile ranking place it among low-end integrated graphics like the Intel HD Graphics 610 and NVIDIA GeForce 710M. The recorded data shows the 860M as the superior choice for measured performance, while the RX 7400's dedicated memory and larger compute configuration may appeal in scenarios where those resources are specifically required.