AMD Radeon 860M vs Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data for these two integrated graphics processors presents an uneven comparison. The AMD Radeon 860M has two benchmark entries in the database, while the Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile currently has no recorded benchmark scores. This means a direct numerical head-to-head comparison is not possible from the database. The AMD part's average benchmark score is 26401, placing it in the 72nd percentile of all GPUs. The Intel part holds a 50th percentile ranking, but its average score is recorded as 0, reflecting the absence of test data.

Focusing on the AMD Radeon 860M's available results, it scores 22759 in the Geekbench OpenCL test and 30043 in the Geekbench Vulkan test. The Vulkan result is notably higher, indicating strong performance under that API. The average score of 26401 places it in close competition with several discrete mobile GPUs. The database lists the NVIDIA GeForce MX550 with an average score of 26421, which puts the AMD part at a delta of -0.1%, meaning it is essentially tied with that discrete GPU. The AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary scores 26553, a 0.6% difference, and the NVIDIA RTX A4000 scores 26683, a 1.1% difference. The AMD Radeon 860M also sits 0.3% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060, which has an average score of 26331. These deltas are all within a narrow band, showing that the integrated 860M competes directly with older and newer discrete options in this specific metric.

For the Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile, the absence of benchmark data in the database means no wins can be recorded for it. Its percentile of 50 is based on the overall distribution of all GPUs, but without a score, the analysis is limited to its specifications and architecture. The data does not allow for any performance-based conclusions relative to the AMD part.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the database records, the AMD Radeon 860M is the only one of the two with measurable performance data. Its average benchmark score of 26401, combined with its 72nd percentile ranking, indicates it delivers competitive integrated graphics performance, rivaling discrete mobile GPUs like the NVIDIA GeForce MX550. The Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile has no recorded scores, so no performance verdict can be rendered from the data. Its 50th percentile is a placeholder ranking without supporting benchmark results.

The specification sheets show different design targets. The AMD part uses a 4 nm process from TSMC, while the Intel part uses a 3 nm process from Intel. The AMD Radeon 860M has a higher boost clock at 3000 MHz compared to the Intel part's 2500 MHz, and it also has more shading units, TMUs, and ROPs. The Intel part has a higher TDP at 25 W versus 15 W for AMD. These numbers suggest the AMD part is designed for higher raw throughput, while the Intel part may rely on its newer process node for efficiency, but performance cannot be confirmed without benchmark data.

Given the available information, the data supports the AMD Radeon 860M as the better-documented performer. Any choice between the two for a specific system would require the Intel part's benchmark results to be populated in the database.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon 860M wins in all recorded benchmark categories because it is the only part with scores. Its OpenCL score of 22759 and Vulkan score of 30043 demonstrate strong API support. The Vulkan result being substantially higher suggests the architecture performs well under modern graphics APIs. The Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile has no recorded wins in the database.

In terms of specifications, the AMD part wins on shading units (512 vs 256), texture mapping units (32 vs 16), and raster operation units (16 vs 8). It also has more ray tracing cores (8 vs 2). The pixel rate of 48.00 GPixel/s for AMD is more than double the Intel part's 20.00 GPixel/s, and the texture rate of 96.00 GTexel/s is similarly higher than Intel's 40.00 GTexel/s. The AMD FP32 throughput is 3.072 TFLOPS, while the Intel part is listed at 1,280.0 GFLOPS, which is 1.28 TFLOPS. These figures indicate the AMD Radeon 860M is designed for higher peak computational throughput.

The Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile wins on process node, using a 3 nm process from Intel compared to AMD's 4 nm TSMC process. It also has a lower base clock of 300 MHz versus 600 MHz, which could contribute to power efficiency at idle, though its TDP is higher at 25 W. The Intel part's FP16 throughput of 2.560 TFLOPS is close to its FP32 figure, but the ratio is 2:1, meaning FP16 is processed at half the rate of FP32. The AMD part has a 1:1 FP16 to FP32 ratio at 3.072 TFLOPS, which is a clear advantage for workloads that use FP16.

FAQ

Q: What is the average benchmark score for the AMD Radeon 860M?

A: The AMD Radeon 860M has an average benchmark score of 26401, which places it in the 72nd percentile of all GPUs in the database.

Q: Does the Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile have any benchmark scores?

A: The database lists no benchmark scores for the Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile. Its average score is recorded as 0, and its percentile of 50 is not backed by test results.

Q: How does the AMD Radeon 860M compare to the NVIDIA GeForce MX550?

A: The AMD Radeon 860M has an average score of 26401, while the NVIDIA GeForce MX550 has an average score of 26421. The delta is -0.1%, meaning the AMD part is virtually tied with the MX550 in this metric.

Q: How do the shading units compare between the two GPUs?

A: The AMD Radeon 860M has 512 shading units, while the Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile has 256 shading units. The AMD part has double the shading units.

Q: Which GPU has a higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Radeon 860M has a boost clock of 3000 MHz, which is higher than the Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile's boost clock of 2500 MHz.

Q: What is the process node for each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon 860M uses a 4 nm process from TSMC, while the Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile uses a 3 nm process from Intel.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon 860M is built on the RDNA 3.5 architecture and uses the Krackan Point chip. It is part of the Navi III IGP generation, specifically the Strix Point Mobile line. The Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile uses the Xe3-LPG architecture with the Wildcat Lake chip, belonging to the Arc Graphics-M generation.

The process nodes differ, with AMD using TSMC's 4 nm process and Intel using its own 3 nm process. Both are integrated graphics processors, but they come from different foundries. The AMD part has an 8-lane PCIe 4.0 interface, while the Intel part is listed simply as "IGP" for its bus interface, indicating it may be connected differently in its mobile platform.

Ray tracing support is present in both, but the AMD part has 8 ray tracing cores versus 2 for Intel. Neither part has tensor cores listed in the database. The FP16 calculation ratios differ: the AMD part operates at 1:1 with FP32, while the Intel part operates at 2:1, meaning its FP16 throughput is half its FP32 rate. The AMD part's FP32 throughput is 3.072 TFLOPS, and the Intel part is 1,280.0 GFLOPS.

The release dates are separated by over a year. The AMD Radeon 860M was released on February 28, 2025, and the Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile on April 15, 2026. Both are listed as Active in production status. The AMD part's predecessor is the Navi II IGP, and the Intel part's predecessor is the HD Graphics-M.

Specification Differences

The AMD Radeon 860M and Intel Arc Graphics 2 Xe Mobile differ in nearly every core specification. The AMD part has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, 16 ROPs, and 8 ray tracing cores. The Intel part has 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, 8 ROPs, and 2 ray tracing cores. These are all exact halves or quarters of the AMD figures.

Clock speeds also differ. The AMD part has a base clock of 600 MHz and a boost clock of 3000 MHz. The Intel part has a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 2500 MHz. The AMD part's pixel rate is 48.00 GPixel/s versus 20.00 GPixel/s for Intel, and its texture rate is 96.00 GTexel/s versus 40.00 GTexel/s.

The FP32 performance is 3.072 TFLOPS for AMD and 1,280.0 GFLOPS for Intel. FP16 performance is 3.072 TFLOPS for AMD and 2.560 TFLOPS for Intel, but the ratios differ as noted. The TDP is another major difference: the AMD part is rated at 15 W, while the Intel part is rated at 25 W.

Both parts use system-shared memory with a system-dependent bandwidth, and both are IGP slot width with no power connectors. The display outputs are portable device dependent for both. The API support is identical: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The AMD part has a PCIe 4.0 x8 bus interface, while the Intel part is listed with "IGP" as its bus interface. Neither part has a launch MSRP recorded in the database.