AMD Radeon 860M vs AMD Radeon RX 7600 Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in OpenCL compute workloads?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7600 delivers a Geekbench OpenCL score of 88051, while the AMD Radeon 860M scores 22759. The RX 7600 leads by 74.2% in this test.

Q: How do the two compare in Vulkan performance?

A: The RX 7600 scores 34401 in Geekbench Vulkan, exceeding the 860M's 30043 by 12.7%. The RX 7600 wins both shared benchmark tests.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each GPU?

A: The 860M has an average benchmark score of 26401, while the RX 7600 averages 15171. The 860M's average is higher despite losing individual tests because its benchmark suite includes only two high-scoring tests.

Q: Which GPU has a higher performance percentile ranking?

A: The 860M sits at the 72nd percentile of all GPUs, while the RX 7600 ranks at the 57th percentile. This reflects the 860M's strong performance in its tested workloads.

Q: What are the nearest rivals for each GPU?

A: The 860M's closest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce MX550 (0.1% faster), followed by the RTX 5060 (0.3% slower). The RX 7600's nearest rival is the RTX 3050 OEM (0.2% faster).

Q: How do the power requirements differ?

A: The 860M has a 15 W TDP and uses no power connectors, being an integrated GPU. The RX 7600 has a 165 W TDP, requires one 8-pin connector, and suggests a 450 W power supply.

Architecture Differences

The two AMD GPUs share the same manufacturer and API support, including DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Both use PCIe 4.0 x8 interfaces. Beyond those commonalities, the architectures diverge significantly.

The 860M is built on the Krackan Point chip with RDNA 3.5 architecture, part of the Navi III IGP (Strix Point Mobile) generation. It uses a 4 nm process from TSMC. Its transistor count and die size are listed as unknown in the database. The RX 7600 uses the Navi 33 chip with RDNA 3.0 architecture, codenamed Hotpink Bonefish, belonging to the Navi III (RX 7000) generation. It uses a 6 nm TSMC process with 13,300 million transistors on a 204 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 65.2 million per mm².

The 860M is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with system-shared memory. Its memory type, bus width, and size are all system dependent, with bandwidth varying by host system. In contrast, the RX 7600 is a discrete card with 8 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The 860M's memory clocks are listed as "System Shared," while the RX 7600 runs at 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective speed.

Compute resources differ substantially. The 860M has 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, 16 render output units, and 8 ray tracing cores. The RX 7600 has 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 32 ray tracing cores. These are exact multiples of the 860M's counts: four times the shading units, four times the TMUs, four times the ROPs, and four times the RT cores.

Clock behavior also differs. The 860M has a base clock of 600 MHz and a boost clock of 3000 MHz. The RX 7600 has a base clock of 1720 MHz, a game clock of 2250 MHz, and a boost clock of 2655 MHz. The 860M's boost clock is higher than the RX 7600's, but its base clock is much lower.

The RX 7600 is a dual-slot card measuring 204 mm by 115 mm, with one 8-pin power connector and display outputs including 1x HDMI 2.1a and 3x DisplayPort 2.1. The 860M is an IGP with no slot width, no power connectors, and display outputs that are portable device dependent. The RX 7600's production status is Active, released on 2023-05-24, with a predecessor of Navi II and successor of Navi IV. The 860M is also Active, released on 2025-02-28, with a predecessor of Navi II IGP and no successor listed.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 7600 wins in raw compute throughput. Its pixel rate is 169.9 GPixel/s versus the 860M's 48.00 GPixel/s. Its texture rate is 339.8 GTexel/s versus 96.00 GTexel/s. Its FP32 performance is 21.75 TFLOPS versus 3.072 TFLOPS, and its FP16 performance matches at 21.75 TFLOPS versus 3.072 TFLOPS. In both head-to-head benchmarks, the RX 7600 wins decisively.

The 860M wins in efficiency metrics. Its 15 W TDP is dramatically lower than the RX 7600's 165 W. It requires no power connectors and no suggested power supply, making it suitable for portable devices. Its integrated nature removes the need for physical installation in a slot.

In benchmark percentiles, the 860M ranks higher at 72 versus the RX 7600's 57. The 860M's average benchmark score of 26401 also exceeds the RX 7600's 15171. However, this average is computed from only two tests, both of which the RX 7600 wins. The RX 7600's average is dragged down by its Passmark scores, including 16634 in G3D, 8790 in GPU compute, and lower marks in DirectX 9 (226), DirectX 11 (172), DirectX 10 (84), and DirectX 12 (58).

For gaming workloads, the RX 7600's dedicated memory and higher throughput give it the advantage. Its 8 GB GDDR6 with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth far exceeds the system-shared memory of the 860M. In compute-heavy applications, the RX 7600's 21.75 TFLOPS FP32 performance dominates.

For mobile and low-power scenarios, the 860M wins. Its 4 nm process and 15 W TDP make it viable for thin-and-light devices. The system-dependent memory means performance scales with the host platform, but the architecture is designed for integrated use.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon 860M | AMD Radeon RX 7600 |

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

| Architecture | RDNA 3.5 | RDNA 3.0 |

| Chip | Krackan Point | Navi 33 |

| Generation | Navi III IGP (Strix Point Mobile) | Navi III (RX 7000) |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 6 nm |

| Transistors | Unknown | 13,300 million |

| Die Size | Unknown | 204 mm² |

| Transistor Density | N/A | 65.2M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 600 MHz | 1720 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 3000 MHz | 2655 MHz |

| Game Clock | N/A | 2250 MHz |

| Memory Size | System Shared | 8 GB |

| Memory Type | System Shared | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus | System Shared | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | System Dependent | 288.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 512 | 2048 |

| TMUs | 32 | 128 |

| ROPs | 16 | 64 |

| RT Cores | 8 | 32 |

| Pixel Rate | 48.00 GPixel/s | 169.9 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 96.00 GTexel/s | 339.8 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 3.072 TFLOPS | 21.75 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 3.072 TFLOPS (1:1) | 21.75 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 15 W | 165 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | 1x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | N/A | 450 W |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 1x HDMI 2.1a, 3x DisplayPort 2.1 |

| Release Date | 2025-02-28 | 2023-05-24 |

| Predecessor | Navi II IGP | Navi II |

| Successor | N/A | Navi IV |

| Launch MSRP | N/A | 269 USD |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records two direct comparisons between the 860M and RX 7600. The RX 7600 wins both, but the margins differ substantially.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 7600 scores 88051 against the 860M's 22759. This is a 74.2% advantage for the RX 7600, the largest gap in any shared test. The RX 7600's 2048 shading units operating at a 1720 MHz base clock produce far higher FP32 throughput at 21.75 TFLOPS. The 860M's 512 shading units at a 600 MHz base clock yield only 3.072 TFLOPS. This sevenfold difference in raw compute is reflected in the OpenCL score gap.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the RX 7600 scores 34401 against the 860M's 30043. The RX 7600 leads by 12.7%. This narrower margin indicates that Vulkan workloads, which often rely on driver efficiency and memory bandwidth, favor the 860M more than OpenCL does. The 860M's boost clock of 3000 MHz, which exceeds the RX 7600's 2655 MHz boost, helps close the gap in this API. The system-shared memory bandwidth, while dependent on the host, can be sufficient for Vulkan's asynchronous compute patterns.

The RX 7600's full benchmark suite provides additional context. Its Passmark G3D score is 16634, and its GPU compute score is 8790. DirectX 9, 11, 12, and 10 scores are 226, 172, 58, and 84 respectively. The G2D score is 984. These scores, combined with the Geekbench results, give the RX 7600 an average benchmark score of 15171.

The 860M's average benchmark score of 26401 is higher than the RX 7600's 15171 despite losing both head-to-head tests. This occurs because the 860M's average is computed from only two high-scoring Geekbench tests, while the RX 7600's average includes many lower Passmark scores. The 860M's percentile ranking of 72 versus 57 reflects this different measurement basis.

The nearest rival data confirms each GPU's competitive position. The 860M's closest competitor, the NVIDIA GeForce MX550, scores 26421, just 0.1% above the 860M. The RTX 5060 scores 26331, 0.3% below. The RX 7600's nearest rival, the RTX 3050 OEM, scores 15199, 0.2% above. The AMD Radeon 680M scores 15270, 0.7% above the RX 7600, showing that an integrated GPU can approach the RX 7600's average in certain workloads.

The Verdict

The data indicates a clear split in intended use cases. The AMD Radeon RX 7600 is the superior performer in absolute terms. It wins both head-to-head benchmarks with a 74.2% margin in OpenCL and a 12.7% margin in Vulkan. Its 21.75 TFLOPS FP32 performance, 169.9 GPixel/s pixel rate, and 339.8 GTexel/s texture rate are multiples of the 860M's corresponding figures. Its 8 GB of GDDR6 memory with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth provides dedicated, consistent memory performance that the 860M cannot match with system-shared memory.

For desktop gaming and compute workloads, the RX 7600 is the choice. Its 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs handle modern game workloads at higher resolutions and detail levels. The 32 ray tracing cores provide hardware RT support that the 860M's 8 RT cores cannot match in throughput. The dual-slot design with one 8-pin connector and a suggested 450 W PSU indicates its intended placement in full desktop systems.

The AMD Radeon 860M serves a different role. Its 15 W TDP makes it suitable for portable devices where power draw is critical. The 4 nm process node and 600 MHz base clock with 3000 MHz boost allow it to reach high performance when needed while maintaining low idle power. Its 72nd percentile ranking and average benchmark score of 26401 show that integrated graphics have advanced significantly, with the 860M performing near discrete mobile GPUs like the MX550.

The 860M's 30043 Vulkan score, only 12.7% behind the RX 7600, indicates that in API-optimized workloads, the gap narrows considerably. Its high boost clock compensates for lower shader counts in certain scenarios. For users on portable devices, the 860M provides competitive performance without the power and space requirements of a discrete GPU.

The RX 7600's release date of 2023-05-24 and the 860M's release of 2025-02-28 show a generational gap in timing. The RX 7600 belongs to the RX 7000 series with a launch MSRP of 269 USD. The 860M has no launch MSRP, consistent with its integrated nature.

For desktop builders requiring maximum performance, the RX 7600's benchmark wins and hardware specifications make it the clear choice. For mobile users prioritizing battery life and portability, the 860M's efficiency and competitive Vulkan performance offer a viable alternative. The database's head-to-head results, with wins A at 0 and wins B at 2, confirm the RX 7600's dominance in direct comparison, but the 860M's higher percentile ranking and average score demonstrate that integrated graphics have closed much of the gap in specific workloads.