AMD Radeon 860M vs AMD Radeon RX 7600S Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows two Geekbench entries covering both OpenCL and Vulkan workloads. The AMD Radeon RX 7600S wins both head-to-head comparisons, and the deltas are substantial.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 7600S scores 68012 against 22759 for the Radeon 860M. That translates to a 66.5% advantage for the discrete mobile GPU. This is the larger of the two deltas recorded. The RX 7600S also leads in Geekbench Vulkan, scoring 73868 versus 30043, a 59.3% margin. The consistent pattern across both APIs indicates the performance gap is not workload-specific but reflects a fundamental throughput difference between the two parts.

The Radeon 860M has zero recorded head-to-head wins. The RX 7600S takes both. The 860M does hold a higher percentile rank among all GPUs, sitting at the 72nd percentile versus the 60th percentile for the RX 7600S. This apparent contradiction is explained by the differing benchmark suites recorded in the database. The 860M has only the two Geekbench entries, while the RX 7600S includes additional DirectX and Passmark results, which pull its average down.

Looking at average benchmark scores, the 860M averages 26401 across its two tests. The RX 7600S averages 16696 across ten tests. The RX 7600S average is dragged lower by its Passmark DirectX 9 score of 211, DirectX 10 score of 74, DirectX 11 score of 140, and DirectX 12 score of 65. Those legacy API results are not directly comparable to the Geekbench figures. The RX 7600S also records a Passmark G3D score of 15408 and a GPU compute score of 6520.

The nearest rivals for each product further indicate their positioning. The 860M's nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce MX550, has an average score of 26421, a 0.1% delta. The RX 7600S's nearest rival, the NVIDIA T400 4 GB, averages 16792, a 0.6% delta. These rival deltas are small, showing both products sit close to their immediate competitors in the database.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different RDNA generations and different physical designs. The Radeon 860M uses the Krackan Point chip, built on the RDNA 3.5 architecture. The RX 7600S uses the Navi 33 chip, codenamed Hotpink Bonefish, on RDNA 3.0. The 860M belongs to the Navi III IGP generation for Strix Point Mobile; the RX 7600S belongs to the Navi Mobile RX 7000M generation.

Process technology differs. The 860M is fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The RX 7600S uses a 6 nm process, also at TSMC. The transistor counts are not published for the 860M, but the RX 7600S contains 13,300 million transistors on a 204 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 65.2 million per square millimeter. The 860M die size is also unknown.

Clock behavior differs substantially. The 860M has a base clock of 600 MHz and a boost clock of 3000 MHz. The RX 7600S has a base clock of 1500 MHz, a game clock of 1865 MHz, and a boost clock of 2200 MHz. The 860M reaches a higher peak boost frequency, but the RX 7600S sustains higher base and game clocks.

Execution resources are heavily skewed toward the RX 7600S. The 860M has 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, 16 raster operation units, and 8 ray tracing cores. The RX 7600S has 1792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, 64 raster operation units, and 28 ray tracing cores. In every category, the RX 7600S has more than triple the resources of the 860M.

Memory architecture is fundamentally different. The 860M uses system shared memory with no dedicated VRAM; its bus width and bandwidth are system dependent. The RX 7600S has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128 bit bus, delivering 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The memory clock for the RX 7600S is 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective speed.

The power envelopes diverge sharply. The 860M has a TDP of 15 W. The RX 7600S has a TDP of 75 W. Both are listed as IGP slot width with no power connectors, and both have display outputs that are portable device dependent. The 860M uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface; the RX 7600S uses PCIe 4.0 x16.

Compute rates reflect the resource disparity. The 860M delivers 3.072 TFLOPS FP32 and the same 3.072 TFLOPS FP16 on a 1:1 ratio. The RX 7600S delivers 15.77 TFLOPS FP32 and 31.54 TFLOPS FP16 on a 2:1 ratio. Pixel rate is 48.00 GPixel/s for the 860M versus 140.8 GPixel/s for the RX 7600S. Texture rate is 96.00 GTexel/s versus 246.4 GTexel/s.

Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The RX 7600S was released on 2023-01-03; the 860M on 2025-02-28. The 860M's predecessor is the Navi II IGP; the RX 7600S's predecessor is Polaris Mobile.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 7600S wins every recorded performance comparison. Its 66.5% lead in OpenCL and 59.3% lead in Vulkan define the performance envelope. The practical consequence is that any workload sensitive to raw compute throughput favors the RX 7600S. The 5.13x advantage in FP32 throughput (15.77 versus 3.072 TFLOPS) and the 2.93x pixel rate advantage support this.

The 860M wins in efficiency-oriented metrics. It operates at 15 W TDP versus 75 W for the RX 7600S, a fivefold power difference. The 860M also reaches a higher boost clock of 3000 MHz versus 2200 MHz, which can benefit lightly threaded or latency-sensitive tasks that scale with frequency rather than parallel throughput. Its system shared memory model means no dedicated VRAM allocation is required, which can reduce overall system cost and complexity in integrated designs.

The 860M holds a higher percentile rank, 72 versus 60, but this reflects the narrower benchmark set. The 860M's average score of 26401 is 58% higher than the RX 7600S's 16696. The RX 7600S includes Passmark results for legacy DirectX versions, which score very low (65 to 211), and these drag the average down. The 860M has no such legacy results recorded.

For users running modern Vulkan or OpenCL applications, the RX 7600S is the clear choice. For users constrained by power budgets or needing an integrated solution with no discrete memory, the 860M offers a functional alternative, though with substantially lower compute capability.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher Geekbench OpenCL score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7600S scores 68012 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the AMD Radeon 860M scores 22759. The RX 7600S leads by 66.5%.

Q: What is the difference in Vulkan performance?

A: The RX 7600S scores 73868 in Geekbench Vulkan versus 30043 for the 860M. The RX 7600S leads by 59.3%.

Q: How do the shading unit counts compare?

A: The RX 7600S has 1792 shading units, while the 860M has 512. The RX 7600S also has 112 texture mapping units and 64 raster operation units, versus 32 and 16 respectively for the 860M.

Q: What are the memory configurations?

A: The RX 7600S has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128 bit bus with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth. The 860M uses system shared memory with no dedicated VRAM, and its bandwidth is system dependent.

Q: Which GPU has the higher boost clock?

A: The 860M has a boost clock of 3000 MHz, which is higher than the RX 7600S's boost clock of 2200 MHz. However, the RX 7600S has a higher base clock at 1500 MHz versus 600 MHz.

Q: How do the TDP values differ?

A: The 860M has a TDP of 15 W. The RX 7600S has a TDP of 75 W. The RX 7600S consumes five times the power budget.

The Verdict

The data presents a one-sided comparison. The AMD Radeon RX 7600S wins both recorded head-to-head benchmarks by margins of 59.3% and 66.5%. Its compute resources dwarf the 860M: 1792 shading units versus 512, 15.77 TFLOPS FP32 versus 3.072 TFLOPS, and 256.0 GB/s dedicated memory bandwidth versus system shared memory. Any application that can utilize these resources will favor the RX 7600S.

The AMD Radeon 860M is not without merit. It operates at 15 W TDP, reaches a higher boost clock of 3000 MHz, and holds a higher percentile rank among all GPUs at 72 versus 60. Its average benchmark score of 26401 exceeds the RX 7600S's 16696, though this is an artifact of benchmark selection rather than a true performance advantage.

The choice depends on the usage context. For sustained compute workloads, gaming, or any task that scales with raw throughput, the RX 7600S is the only option that delivers competitive performance. Its 66.5% OpenCL lead and 59.3% Vulkan lead are decisive. For power-constrained mobile designs where the 15 W TDP and integrated form factor are mandatory, the 860M provides a functional but significantly weaker alternative. The RX 7600S is the performance winner in every measurable category; the 860M is the efficiency winner in power draw and peak frequency. Users needing maximum compute should select the RX 7600S. Users needing an integrated solution with minimal power draw should select the 860M, accepting the substantial performance trade-off.