AMD Radeon 860M vs AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data in this comparison is unambiguous. The AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT wins both recorded head-to-head tests, leaving the AMD Radeon 860M without a single victory in the two shared workloads. The most extreme gap appears in Geekbench OpenCL, where the RX 7700 XT scores 138,383 against the 860M's 22,759, a delta of 83.6% in favor of the discrete card. That is not a marginal lead; it is a generational chasm in raw compute throughput.

The Geekbench Vulkan test tells a similar story, though with a narrower margin. The RX 7700 XT posts 46,443, while the 860M manages 30,043, putting the integrated part 35.3% behind. The Vulkan result is notable because it shows the 860M is not entirely outclassed in API-level efficiency. Its RDNA 3.5 architecture and 8 ray tracing cores allow it to stay within striking distance in a workload that leverages modern graphics APIs, even though the raw shader output of the RX 7700 XT remains far superior.

Looking at the broader database averages, the RX 7700 XT holds an average benchmark score of 22,549, while the 860M averages 26,401. That is a counterintuitive result at first glance. The 860M's average is inflated by the fact that it has only two recorded benchmarks, both of which are Geekbench tests where it performs respectably relative to its power envelope. The RX 7700 XT, by contrast, has ten recorded benchmarks, including multiple Passmark tests that drag its average down. The Passmark G3D score of 22,547 for the RX 7700 XT is actually close to its overall average, but the low Passmark DirectX scores, such as 79 in DirectX 12 and 119 in DirectX 10, pull the mean lower. The 860M has no Passmark results in the database, so its average is calculated from a far smaller and more favorable sample.

The percentile rankings reinforce the divide. The 860M sits at the 72nd percentile among all GPUs, which is strong for an integrated part, while the RX 7700 XT lands at the 67th percentile. The 860M's higher percentile confirms how well it punches above its weight class, particularly in Geekbench Vulkan, where its 30,043 score places it near the upper tier of mobile and integrated graphics. The RX 7700 XT's lower percentile reflects the broader field of discrete GPUs it competes against, many of which are newer or more expensive.

The nearest rival data provides additional context. The 860M's closest competitor is the NVIDIA GeForce MX550, which averages 26,421, a delta of just 0.1% against the 860M. The 860M also trades blows with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 (26,331, 0.3% ahead of the 860M) and the AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary (26,553, 0.6% ahead). The RTX A4000 sits 1.1% ahead at 26,683. These are tight margins, indicating that the 860M performs in the same band as entry-level discrete GPUs from previous generations. The RX 7700 XT, meanwhile, faces stiffer competition: its nearest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Mobile at 22,435 (0.5% ahead of the 7700 XT), followed by the RTX 4060 Mobile at 22,729 (0.8% behind), the RTX 2080 at 22,895 (1.5% behind), and the AMD Radeon RX 5700 at 22,170 (1.7% ahead). The RX 7700 XT's position among these rivals shows it sits in a crowded mid-range discrete segment where small score differences separate products.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT wins decisively, scoring 138,383 against the 860M's 22,759, a difference of 83.6%.

Q: Is the integrated 860M competitive with the RX 7700 XT in any benchmark?

A: The closest result is in Geekbench Vulkan, where the 860M scores 30,043 versus the RX 7700 XT's 46,443, a 35.3% gap. It is still a clear loss, but the margin is far smaller than in OpenCL.

Q: How does the 860M's average benchmark score compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The 860M averages 26,401, which is nearly identical to the NVIDIA GeForce MX550 (26,421, 0.1% difference) and slightly ahead of the RTX 5060 (26,331, 0.3% ahead). It trails the RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary by 0.6% and the RTX A4000 by 1.1%.

Q: Why does the RX 7700 XT have a lower average benchmark score than the 860M despite winning the head-to-head tests?

A: The RX 7700 XT has ten recorded benchmarks, including several Passmark DirectX tests with low scores (79 in DirectX 12, 119 in DirectX 10), which lower its average to 22,549. The 860M has only two benchmarks, both Geekbench tests, so its average of 26,401 reflects a smaller, more favorable sample.

Q: Which GPU has a higher percentile ranking among all GPUs?

A: The 860M ranks at the 72nd percentile, while the RX 7700 XT ranks at the 67th percentile. The integrated part's higher percentile is notable given its 15 W TDP.

Q: What is the RX 7700 XT's position among its nearest rivals?

A: The RX 7700 XT averages 22,549. Its nearest rival, the RTX 5060 Mobile, averages 22,435 (0.5% ahead of the 7700 XT). The RTX 4060 Mobile (22,729) sits 0.8% behind, the RTX 2080 (22,895) is 1.5% behind, and the RX 5700 (22,170) is 1.7% ahead.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations and target entirely different market segments. The AMD Radeon 860M is built on RDNA 3.5 and uses the Krackan Point chip, part of the Navi III IGP (Strix Point Mobile) generation. The AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT uses RDNA 3.0 and the Navi 32 chip, falling under the Navi III (RX 7000) generation. The process nodes also differ: the 860M is fabbed on a 4 nm process at TSMC, while the RX 7700 XT uses a 5 nm process, also at TSMC. The smaller node gives the integrated part a density advantage, though the discrete card compensates with a much larger die.

The RX 7700 XT's die size is listed at 346 mm² with 28,100 million transistors, yielding a transistor density of 81.2M per mm². The 860M's transistor count and die size are listed as unknown, so a direct density comparison is not possible. What is clear is the scale difference: the RX 7700 XT dedicates 3,456 shading units, 216 texture mapping units, and 96 ROPs to its workload, while the 860M fields 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The RX 7700 XT also carries 54 ray tracing cores against the 860M's 8, a 6.75x advantage in RT hardware.

Compute throughput follows the same pattern. The RX 7700 XT delivers 35.17 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the 860M manages 3.072 TFLOPS, an 11.4x gap. Both parts run FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, so the same proportional difference applies in half-precision workloads. Pixel and texture rates also heavily favor the discrete card: the RX 7700 XT reaches 244.2 GPixel/s and 549.5 GTexel/s, versus 48.00 GPixel/s and 96.00 GTexel/s for the 860M.

Memory architecture is a fundamental divergence. The 860M uses system shared memory, with bus width, type, and bandwidth all listed as system dependent. The RX 7700 XT has 12 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory on a 192 bit bus, delivering 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The discrete card's memory clock runs at 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective speed. The 860M's memory clock is listed as system shared, meaning it has no fixed memory speed of its own.

Both GPUs support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API feature parity exists on paper. The RX 7700 XT has a higher boost clock at 2544 MHz versus the 860M's 3000 MHz, but the integrated part's higher boost is offset by its much lower shader count. The 860M's base clock is 600 MHz, while the RX 7700 XT starts at 1435 MHz and has a game clock of 2171 MHz. The RX 7700 XT also has a listed successor in Navi IV, while the 860M's predecessor is Navi II IGP.

Specification Differences

The most obvious specification gap is in memory. The RX 7700 XT has 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192 bit bus with 432.0 GB/s bandwidth. The 860M relies entirely on system shared memory, with type, bus width, and bandwidth all listed as system dependent. There is no fixed memory allocation for the integrated part.

Shading resources differ by an order of magnitude. The RX 7700 XT has 3,456 shading units, 216 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. The 860M has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The RX 7700 XT also has 54 ray tracing cores versus 8 on the 860M. Compute output shows 35.17 TFLOPS FP32 for the discrete card against 3.072 TFLOPS for the integrated part.

Power and physical specs are equally divergent. The RX 7700 XT has a TDP of 245 W, requires a 550 W suggested PSU, uses dual-slot cooling, and needs 2x 8-pin power connectors. The 860M has a TDP of 15 W, is an IGP with no power connectors, and takes up no expansion slot. The RX 7700 XT is 267 mm long, 135 mm tall, and 50 mm wide; the 860M has no listed dimensions. The RX 7700 XT connects via PCIe 4.0 x16, while the 860M uses PCIe 4.0 x8. Display outputs also differ: the RX 7700 XT has 1x HDMI 2.1a, 2x DisplayPort 2.1, and 1x USB Type-C, while the 860M's outputs are portable device dependent.

Clock behavior sets them apart. The RX 7700 XT has a base clock of 1435 MHz, a game clock of 2171 MHz, and a boost clock of 2544 MHz. The 860M has a 600 MHz base and a 3000 MHz boost. The RX 7700 XT's memory clock is 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective speed; the 860M's memory clock is system shared. The RX 7700 XT has a launch MSRP of 449 USD. The 860M has no launch MSRP listed. Release dates also differ: the RX 7700 XT launched on 2023-09-05, while the 860M arrived on 2025-02-28. The RX 7700 XT's predecessor is Navi II and its successor is Navi IV; the 860M's predecessor is Navi II IGP with no listed successor.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear conclusion: the AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT is the dominant performer in every shared benchmark, and the margins are not close. In Geekbench OpenCL, it leads by 83.6%, and in Geekbench Vulkan, it leads by 35.3%. Its 12 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory, 432.0 GB/s bandwidth, and 35.17 TFLOPS FP32 compute, combined with 54 ray tracing cores, make it the obvious choice for any workload that demands sustained, high-throughput graphics processing. The RX 7700 XT is a discrete, dual-slot card with a 245 W TDP and a 550 W suggested PSU, built for desktop systems where power and cooling are not constraints. Its nearest rivals, the RTX 5060 Mobile and RTX 4060 Mobile, are within 0.8% of its average score, placing it squarely in the mid-range discrete tier.

The AMD Radeon 860M, however, is not without its own logic. Its 72nd percentile ranking, 15 W TDP, and 4 nm process make it an exceptional integrated solution for portable devices. Its Geekbench Vulkan score of 30,043, while 35.3% behind the RX 7700 XT, is still competitive with entry-level discrete GPUs like the MX550, which it matches within 0.1%. The 860M requires no power connectors, no expansion slot, and no dedicated memory, making it the only reasonable choice for thin-and-light laptops or compact systems where the RX 7700 XT's 267 mm length and dual-slot footprint would be impossible to accommodate.

Who should pick which? The RX 7700 XT is for users who need maximum frame rates, ray tracing performance, and memory bandwidth in a desktop build. The 860M is for users who prioritize portability, power efficiency, and adequate integrated graphics in a mobile form factor. The 860M's higher percentile ranking (72 versus 67) and competitive nearest-rival scores show that it excels within its class, but the RX 7700 XT's raw performance numbers, including a 6.75x advantage in ray tracing cores and an 11.4x lead in FP32 throughput, leave no doubt about which GPU is faster. The choice comes down to the system, not the silicon.