AMD Radeon 860M vs AMD Radeon RX 7800M Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a decisive picture. In the two shared tests, the AMD Radeon RX 7800M wins both outright. The most substantial margin comes in Geekbench OpenCL, where the RX 7800M scores 120,778 against the Radeon 860M's 22,759 — a delta of 430.7%. That is not an incremental lead; it is a multi-generational gap in raw compute throughput. The RX 7800M's Geekbench Vulkan result of 126,668 further widens the narrative, beating the 860M's 30,043 by 321.6%. Both tests are compute-oriented, but they also reflect the architectural resources each part brings to bear.

Looking at the broader synthetic picture, the RX 7800M carries an average benchmark score of 27,883 across all its tests, while the 860M averages 26,401 based on its two Geekbench entries. The RX 7800M also lands in the 73rd percentile of all GPUs, with the 860M close behind at the 72nd percentile. This is an interesting divergence: the 860M's percentile is respectable, yet its head-to-head deltas against the RX 7800M are enormous. That suggests the 860M's percentile is buoyed by a different test distribution, not by competitive performance against this specific rival.

Within the RX 7800M's own benchmark suite, 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 yields 2,994 points, and Passmark G3D produces 17,613. These are not directly comparable to any 860M result, but they establish the RX 7800M's baseline across DirectX 12, DirectX 11, and compute workloads. The 860M has no Passmark or 3DMark entries in the data, so cross-validation with the RX 7800M is limited to the two Geekbench runs. Still, those two runs are sufficient to see the trend: the RX 7800M is faster by a factor of roughly four to five times in compute and graphics API tests.

The nearest rivals listed for each GPU reinforce the gap. The RX 7800M sits within 0.8% of the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 20, Pro W5500X, NVIDIA GTX 980 Ti, and FirePro S7150 — all within a tight band around 28,000 average score. The 860M, meanwhile, is bracketed by the NVIDIA MX550, RTX 5060, RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary, and RTX A4000, all within 1.1% of its 26,401 average. The RX 7800M's rival set is composed of discrete desktop and workstation cards; the 860M's rival set includes lower-tier mobile parts. That alone tells you the RX 7800M is competing in a different performance class, despite the 860M's favorable percentile.

The Verdict

From the data alone, the AMD Radeon RX 7800M is the clear performance winner. It leads by 430.7% in OpenCL and 321.6% in Vulkan. No benchmark in the shared set favors the 860M. If the sole criterion is raw speed, the choice is unambiguous. The RX 7800M also has a higher average score (27,883 vs 26,401) and a higher percentile (73rd vs 72nd). Every metric points in one direction.

However, the 860M is not without its own rationale. It is a 15 W part with system-shared memory, designed for ultraportable integration. The RX 7800M is a 180 W discrete-class GPU with 12 GB of dedicated GDDR6. The 860M's power envelope is one-twelfth that of the RX 7800M, and its memory architecture is entirely different. For a user who prioritizes battery life, thermals, and compactness over performance, the 860M is the only logical choice — but only if the workload fits within its 3.072 TFLOPS FP32 ceiling. For anyone needing sustained high-end graphics or compute, the RX 7800M is the data-supported pick.

The verdict hinges on context, not just numbers. The RX 7800M's 2 wins to 0 in head-to-head tests are decisive, but the 860M's 15 W TDP and shared-memory design mean it serves a fundamentally different device category. The benchmark database does not include battery life or thermal tests, so no conclusion can be drawn there. Strictly from the provided performance metrics, the RX 7800M wins every measurable contest.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are built on different generations of RDNA. The RX 7800M uses RDNA 3.0, while the 860M uses RDNA 3.5. The process nodes also differ: the RX 7800M is on TSMC's 5 nm node, and the 860M is on TSMC's 4 nm node. Both are manufactured by TSMC, but the 860M's newer node offers a density advantage in principle, though its die size and transistor count are listed as unknown. The RX 7800M's die measures 346 mm² with 28,100 million transistors, yielding a density of 81.2M per mm².

The compute resources are where the gap becomes stark. The RX 7800M packs 3,840 shading units, 240 texture mapping units, and 96 ROPs. The 860M has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. That is an 8x difference in shader count and a 7.5x difference in TMU count. Ray tracing cores follow the same pattern: 60 on the RX 7800M versus 8 on the 860M. Neither part has tensor cores listed.

Clock behavior is unusual. The RX 7800M has a base clock of 1295 MHz, a boost of 2335 MHz, and a game clock of 2145 MHz. The 860M has a base of only 600 MHz but a boost of 3000 MHz. That higher boost clock does not compensate for the massive shader deficit. The RX 7800M's pixel rate is 224.2 GPixel/s versus 48.00 GPixel/s for the 860M, and texture rates are 560.4 GTexel/s versus 96.00 GTexel/s. FP32 throughput is 35.87 TFLOPS for the RX 7800M and 3.072 TFLOPS for the 860M — an 11.7x difference.

Memory architecture is fundamentally different. The RX 7800M uses 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, delivering 432.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The 860M uses system-shared memory with a system-dependent bandwidth. That means the 860M's performance is partly contingent on the host system's RAM speed and configuration, a variable that does not affect the RX 7800M. The RX 7800M also has a PCIe 4.0 x16 interface versus the 860M's PCIe 4.0 x8.

Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The RX 7800M is from the Navi Mobile (RX 7000M) generation with the codename Wheat Nas, while the 860M belongs to the Navi III IGP (Strix Point Mobile) generation. The RX 7800M's predecessor is Polaris Mobile; the 860M's is Navi II IGP. Release dates differ by roughly six months: the RX 7800M launched in September 2024, and the 860M in February 2025.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute throughput?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7800M. Its FP32 performance is 35.87 TFLOPS, compared to 3.072 TFLOPS for the Radeon 860M. The RX 7800M also has 3,840 shading units versus the 860M's 512.

Q: How do they compare in Geekbench Vulkan?

A: The RX 7800M scores 126,668, which is 321.6% higher than the 860M's 30,043. This is a head-to-head benchmark where the RX 7800M wins outright.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same graphics APIs?

A: Yes. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. There is no difference in API support based on the data.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference?

A: The RX 7800M has 12 GB of dedicated GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus with 432.0 GB/s bandwidth. The 860M uses system-shared memory with a system-dependent bus width and bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has a higher boost clock?

A: The Radeon 860M has a higher boost clock at 3000 MHz, compared to the RX 7800M's 2335 MHz. However, the RX 7800M's base clock is higher (1295 MHz vs 600 MHz), and its larger shader count yields far greater overall performance.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The RX 7800M has an average benchmark score of 27,883. The 860M averages 26,401. The RX 7800M also sits in the 73rd percentile of all GPUs, versus the 860M's 72nd.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 7800M wins every head-to-head benchmark in the dataset. Its victories are not narrow: 430.7% in OpenCL and 321.6% in Vulkan. It also wins on every architectural metric that matters for throughput — shading units, TMUs, ROPs, ray tracing cores, pixel rate, texture rate, and FP32. If the workload is compute-heavy, graphics-intensive, or ray-traced, the RX 7800M is the only candidate with sufficient resources. Its 12 GB of dedicated GDDR6 with 432.0 GB/s bandwidth also means it can handle large textures and datasets without relying on system memory.

The 860M has no benchmark wins in the shared tests. Its only advantages are the higher boost clock (3000 MHz vs 2335 MHz), a smaller process node (4 nm vs 5 nm), and a dramatically lower TDP (15 W vs 180 W). It also uses system-shared memory, which can be advantageous in a unified memory architecture where the CPU and GPU share the same pool — but the bandwidth is system-dependent, so there is no fixed performance guarantee. The 860M's 72nd percentile ranking suggests it performs well within its own class of integrated parts, but that class is far below the RX 7800M's discrete segment.

For a user on a portable device where power draw is critical, the 860M is the sensible pick. The data shows its 15 W TDP versus the RX 7800M's 180 W — a twelvefold difference. For a gaming laptop or mobile workstation where performance is the priority, the RX 7800M is the only defensible choice. There is no scenario in the provided benchmarks where the 860M outperforms the RX 7800M.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon RX 7800M | AMD Radeon 860M |

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

| Architecture | RDNA 3.0 | RDNA 3.5 |

| Process Node | 5 nm | 4 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | TSMC |

| Transistors | 28,100 million | Unknown |

| Die Size | 346 mm² | Unknown |

| Transistor Density | 81.2M / mm² | Not listed |

| Base Clock | 1295 MHz | 600 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2335 MHz | 3000 MHz |

| Game Clock | 2145 MHz | Not listed |

| Memory Size | 12 GB | System Shared |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | System Shared |

| Memory Bus | 192 bit | System Shared |

| Memory Bandwidth | 432.0 GB/s | System Dependent |

| Memory Clock | 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) | System Shared |

| Shading Units | 3840 | 512 |

| TMUs | 240 | 32 |

| ROPs | 96 | 16 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | 60 | 8 |

| Pixel Rate | 224.2 GPixel/s | 48.00 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 560.4 GTexel/s | 96.00 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 35.87 TFLOPS | 3.072 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 35.87 TFLOPS (1:1) | 3.072 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 180 W | 15 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x8 |

| Release Date | 2024-09-10 | 2025-02-28 |

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

| Predecessor | Polaris Mobile | Navi II IGP |