AMD Radeon 860M vs Intel Arc A350M Comparison

AMD Radeon 860M and Intel Arc A350M are two mobile graphics solutions that target the same performance tier but achieve it through fundamentally different designs. The benchmark data shows a split decision: the Intel part wins the OpenCL test while the AMD part dominates in Vulkan, making the choice highly dependent on workload and API preference. The AMD Radeon 860M holds a 72nd percentile ranking among all GPUs, while the Intel Arc A350M sits at the 70th percentile, indicating both are positioned in the same broad performance class.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two GPUs split their two benchmark results exactly, with each taking one decisive victory. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the Intel Arc A350M scores 24,546 points against the AMD Radeon 860M's 22,759 points, giving Intel a 7.3% advantage. This is a meaningful margin in a compute-oriented test that often favors the architecture with higher raw shader throughput. The Arc A350M's 768 shading units and 3.379 TFLOPS of FP32 performance provide a solid foundation for OpenCL workloads, and the data reflects that.

The Vulkan test tells a completely different story. Here, the AMD Radeon 860M scores 30,043 points versus 24,747 for the Intel Arc A350M, a commanding 21.4% lead. This is a substantial gap that suggests the AMD architecture has significant advantages in graphics API efficiency, likely stemming from its RDNA 3.5 design which has been optimized for modern rendering pipelines. The 860M's 3.072 TFLOPS of FP32 performance is actually lower than the Intel part's 3.379 TFLOPS, yet it still delivers a much higher Vulkan score, indicating architectural efficiency matters more than raw compute in this test.

Looking at the overall average benchmark scores, the AMD Radeon 860M posts 26,401 points versus 24,647 for the Intel Arc A350M, a 7.1% difference in favor of AMD. This average masks the individual test results, but it does suggest that AMD's Vulkan advantage is more substantial than Intel's OpenCL advantage. The nearest rival data reinforces this positioning: the 860M's closest competitor is the NVIDIA GeForce MX550 at 26,421 points (a -0.1% delta), while the Arc A350M's closest rival is the AMD Radeon RX 590 at 24,744 points (a -0.4% delta). Both GPUs sit in a tight cluster with other mid-range parts, but the AMD part edges slightly higher in aggregate performance.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon 860M has an average benchmark score of 26,401 points, which is 7.1% higher than the Intel Arc A350M's 24,647 points.

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in OpenCL performance?

A: The Intel Arc A350M wins the OpenCL test with 24,546 points against the AMD Radeon 860M's 22,759 points, a 7.3% advantage for Intel.

Q: Which GPU performs better in Vulkan?

A: The AMD Radeon 860M dominates the Vulkan test with 30,043 points versus 24,747 for the Intel Arc A350M, giving AMD a 21.4% lead.

Q: What are the nearest rivals for each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon 860M's closest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce MX550 at 26,421 points (-0.1% delta), while the Intel Arc A350M's closest rival is the AMD Radeon RX 590 at 24,744 points (-0.4% delta).

Q: Which GPU has a higher percentile ranking?

A: The AMD Radeon 860M ranks in the 72nd percentile of all GPUs, while the Intel Arc A350M ranks in the 70th percentile.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same API levels?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc A350M wins in scenarios that rely on OpenCL compute performance. Its higher shading unit count (768 versus 512) and higher FP32 throughput (3.379 TFLOPS versus 3.072 TFLOPS) give it an edge in general-purpose compute tasks that are not heavily optimized for specific GPU architectures. The 7.3% OpenCL advantage suggests that applications using this API for tasks like video encoding, physics simulation, or productivity workloads may see better performance on the Intel part. Additionally, the Arc A350M has a higher pixel rate (52.80 GPixel/s versus 48.00 GPixel/s) and texture rate (105.6 GTexel/s versus 96.00 GTexel/s), which could benefit certain rasterization-heavy workloads even if the benchmark data does not directly test those scenarios.

The AMD Radeon 860M wins decisively in Vulkan-based workloads, which are increasingly common in modern games and graphics applications. The 21.4% Vulkan advantage is substantial and likely reflects the architectural maturity of RDNA 3.5 in handling modern graphics pipelines, including ray tracing and mesh shaders. The 860M also has more RT cores (8 versus 6), which could provide better ray tracing performance despite the lower overall shader count. For gaming titles that use Vulkan, the AMD part is clearly the stronger choice. The AMD GPU also has a higher boost clock (3000 MHz versus 2200 MHz), which may help in bursty single-frame workloads even if sustained performance is limited by the 15W TDP.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ significantly in their memory configurations. The AMD Radeon 860M uses system-shared memory with a system-dependent bandwidth, while the Intel Arc A350M has 4 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus with 112.0 GB/s of bandwidth. This is a critical distinction: the Intel part's dedicated memory ensures consistent performance regardless of system RAM, while the AMD part's performance depends entirely on the host system's memory speed and configuration.

Clock speeds also differ markedly. The AMD Radeon 860M has a base clock of 600 MHz and a boost clock of 3000 MHz, while the Intel Arc A350M runs at 1150 MHz base and 2200 MHz boost. The AMD part's much higher boost clock suggests it can ramp up aggressively when power and thermals allow, while the Intel part relies on more modest clocks but with a higher base frequency. The TDP also differs: the AMD Radeon 860M is rated at 15W, while the Intel Arc A350M is rated at 25W, meaning Intel's solution requires more power to achieve its performance.

The shading unit count favors Intel (768 versus 512), as do texture mapping units (48 versus 32) and ROPs (24 versus 16). However, the AMD part has more RT cores (8 versus 6). The process node also differs: AMD uses 4 nm TSMC process, while Intel uses 6 nm TSMC process, which partially explains the AMD part's lower power consumption despite higher clocks.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two GPUs is substantial. The AMD Radeon 860M is built on RDNA 3.5, part of the Navi III IGP (Strix Point Mobile) generation, and uses the Krackan Point chip. It is manufactured on a 4 nm TSMC process and has a 1:1 FP16 to FP32 ratio, meaning it delivers 3.072 TFLOPS in both precision formats. This indicates that the architecture does not use dedicated FP16 hardware acceleration, instead treating FP16 and FP32 workloads with equal throughput.

The Intel Arc A350M uses the Xe-HPG architecture with the DG2-128 chip, part of the Alchemist generation (Arc 3 Mobile). It is built on a 6 nm TSMC process with 7,200 million transistors on a 157 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 45.9 million transistors per square millimeter. The Intel part has a 2:1 FP16 to FP32 ratio, delivering 6.758 TFLOPS of FP16 performance compared to 3.379 TFLOPS of FP32, indicating dedicated hardware for FP16 compute that could benefit AI or media workloads.

The AMD part has 8 RT cores while Intel has 6, suggesting different ray tracing implementations. The AMD GPU is also part of the current generation (released February 2025 and still active), while the Intel GPU is from the previous generation (released March 2022 and now end-of-life). The AMD part's predecessor is the Navi II IGP, while the Intel part has no listed predecessor, reflecting their different product line histories.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear choice based on workload priorities. For users who prioritize Vulkan-based gaming or graphics applications, the AMD Radeon 860M is the stronger option, with a 21.4% lead in Vulkan benchmarks and a higher overall average score of 26,401 points. Its higher boost clock, more RT cores, and modern RDNA 3.5 architecture make it well-suited for contemporary rendering workloads. The 72nd percentile ranking and nearest rival being the NVIDIA GeForce MX550 at nearly identical performance suggest it sits comfortably in the mid-range mobile GPU tier.

For users who rely on OpenCL compute workloads, the Intel Arc A350M offers a 7.3% advantage. Its dedicated 4 GB GDDR6 memory with 112.0 GB/s bandwidth provides consistent memory performance, and its higher shader count and FP32 throughput make it capable in compute-heavy tasks. However, the end-of-life status and 25W TDP are considerations, and its 70th percentile ranking places it slightly below the AMD part in overall performance.

The average benchmark scores suggest the AMD Radeon 860M is the more balanced performer, with a 7.1% higher average and wins in the more modern Vulkan API. The Intel Arc A350M's strengths are confined to OpenCL and raw compute throughput, which may matter less in typical consumer workloads. Unless a specific application relies heavily on OpenCL, the data supports choosing the AMD Radeon 860M for better all-around graphics performance, particularly in Vulkan-based titles.