AMD Radeon 860M vs Intel Data Center GPU Max Subsystem Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark comparisons between the AMD Radeon 860M and the Intel Data Center GPU Max Subsystem. The head-to-head benchmark array is empty, and neither part has a shared test suite that would allow a direct side-by-side measurement. The AMD Radeon 860M has two benchmark entries: a Geekbench OpenCL score of 22,759 and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 30,043. These produce an average benchmark score of 26,401, placing it at the 72nd percentile among all GPUs in the database. The Intel Data Center GPU Max Subsystem has no recorded benchmark scores, an average benchmark score of 0, and sits at the 50th percentile. The absence of measured results for the Intel part means the only quantitative comparison available is through the AMD part’s nearest rivals, which do not include the Intel Data Center GPU Max Subsystem.

The AMD Radeon 860M’s average score of 26,401 places it within a tight cluster of competing parts. It trails the NVIDIA GeForce MX550 by a negligible 0.1%, with the MX550 averaging 26,421. It leads the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 by 0.3%, as that part averages 26,331. The AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary sits 0.6% ahead at 26,553, while the NVIDIA RTX A4000 is 1.1% ahead at 26,683. These deltas are all within a 1.7 percentage point band, indicating that the Radeon 860M delivers performance statistically equivalent to these four discrete GPUs in the database’s aggregate scoring. The Intel Data Center GPU Max Subsystem, lacking any benchmark entries, cannot be ranked against these parts using measured data.

Since no head-to-head tests exist, the wins tally is zero for both products. Any assessment of relative performance must instead rely on the architectural and specification data recorded for each part, which differ enormously in scale and purpose.

FAQ

Q: Does the AMD Radeon 860M have any benchmark scores in the database?

A: Yes. It records a Geekbench OpenCL score of 22,759 and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 30,043, giving an average benchmark score of 26,401.

Q: Does the Intel Data Center GPU Max Subsystem have any benchmark scores?

A: No. Its benchmark list is empty, and its average benchmark score is recorded as 0.

Q: What percentile does each GPU hold?

A: The AMD Radeon 860M sits at the 72nd percentile among all GPUs, while the Intel Data Center GPU Max Subsystem sits at the 50th percentile.

Q: How does the AMD Radeon 860M compare to its nearest rivals?

A: It is 0.1% behind the NVIDIA GeForce MX550, 0.3% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060, 0.6% behind the AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary, and 1.1% behind the NVIDIA RTX A4000.

Q: What is the thermal design power of each part?

A: The AMD Radeon 860M has a TDP of 15 W, while the Intel Data Center GPU Max Subsystem has a TDP of 2,400 W.

Q: What memory configuration does each part use?

A: The AMD Radeon 860M uses system-shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth. The Intel Data Center GPU Max Subsystem uses 128 GB of HBM2e memory on an 8,192-bit bus with 3.21 TB/s of bandwidth.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear split by use case. The AMD Radeon 860M is an integrated graphics processor with a 15 W TDP and a 72nd percentile standing, backed by measured OpenCL and Vulkan scores. It is designed for portable devices, as its display outputs are portable-device dependent and its memory is system shared. The Intel Data Center GPU Max Subsystem is a dual-slot data center accelerator with a 2,400 W TDP, a 2,800 W suggested power supply, a 1x 16-pin power connector, and no display outputs. It targets compute workloads, not graphics output.

The Intel part’s 50th percentile with no measured benchmarks is not a performance verdict; it reflects an absence of data in the database. The AMD part’s 72nd percentile is based on actual recorded results. For any user needing integrated graphics in a low-power mobile context, the Radeon 860M has the measured scores and the IGP form factor. For a data center accelerator with massive memory and compute resources, the Intel Max Subsystem offers 128 GB of HBM2e, 52.43 TFLOPS FP32, and PCIe 5.0 x16 connectivity, but no benchmark evidence in this database. The choice depends entirely on whether the workload is client-side graphics or server-side data center compute.

Specification Differences

The two parts differ in nearly every recorded specification. The AMD Radeon 860M is built on a 4 nm TSMC process, while the Intel Data Center GPU Max Subsystem uses a 10 nm Intel process. The Intel part reports 100,000 million transistors on a 1,280 mm² die with a transistor density of 78.1 million per mm²; the AMD part’s transistor count and die size are unknown.

Clock speeds diverge sharply. The Radeon 860M has a 600 MHz base clock and a 3,000 MHz boost clock. The Intel part has a 900 MHz base clock and a 1,600 MHz boost clock, with memory clocked at 1,565 MHz or 3.1 Gbps effective.

Memory specifications are fundamentally different. The Radeon 860M uses system-shared memory with a system-shared bus width and system-dependent bandwidth. The Intel part uses 128 GB of HBM2e on an 8,192-bit bus with 3.21 TB/s of bandwidth.

The compute units differ by an order of magnitude. The Radeon 860M has 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, 16 raster output units, and 8 ray tracing cores. The Intel part has 16,384 shading units, 1,024 texture mapping units, 0 raster output units, and 128 ray tracing cores. Pixel rates reflect this: the Radeon 860M produces 48.00 GPixel/s, while the Intel part records 0 MPixel/s. Texture rates are 96.00 GTexel/s for the AMD part and 1,638.4 GTexel/s for the Intel part. FP32 performance is 3.072 TFLOPS for the AMD part and 52.43 TFLOPS for the Intel part, with both listed at a 1:1 FP16 ratio.

Power and physical requirements are starkly different. The Radeon 860M is a 15 W IGP with no power connectors and a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface. The Intel part is a 2,400 W dual-slot card that is 267 mm or 10.5 inches long, requires a 1x 16-pin power connector, suggests a 2,800 W power supply, and uses a PCIe 5.0 x16 interface.

API support differs as well. The AMD part supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Intel part supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and OpenGL 4.6, with no Vulkan version recorded.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon 860M uses the RDNA 3.5 architecture on the Krackan Point chip, belonging to the Navi III IGP generation for Strix Point Mobile. The Intel Data Center GPU Max Subsystem uses Generation 12.5 architecture on the Ponte Vecchio chip, in the Data Center GPU generation. The AMD part is fabricated by TSMC at 4 nm; the Intel part is fabricated by Intel at 10 nm.

The AMD part is an integrated GPU with no separate memory, drawing from system memory. The Intel part is a discrete accelerator with its own 128 GB HBM2e stack. The Radeon 860M has 8 ray tracing cores and a full raster pipeline with 16 ROPs. The Intel part has 128 ray tracing cores but 0 ROPs, meaning it has no traditional raster output stage, consistent with a data center compute accelerator rather than a display-oriented GPU.

The AMD part’s predecessor is listed as Navi II IGP, and it was released on 2025-02-28. The Intel part has no recorded predecessor, lists H3C Graphics as its successor, and was released on 2023-01-09. The AMD part is still active in production, as is the Intel part.

The Intel part’s 1,280 mm² die size and 100,000 million transistor count place it in an entirely different physical class from the Radeon 860M, whose die size is unknown but whose 15 W TDP indicates a small integrated design. The Intel part’s 2,400 W TDP and suggested 2,800 W power supply confirm it is a rack-scale component, not a client processor component.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon 860M wins in client-side integrated graphics scenarios. Its 15 W TDP fits within mobile power envelopes, its IGP slot width means it occupies no expansion slot, and its portable-device-dependent display outputs indicate it drives built-in panels. Its measured Geekbench OpenCL score of 22,759 and Vulkan score of 30,043 give it a 72nd percentile rank, and its average score of 26,401 matches discrete GPUs like the NVIDIA GeForce MX550 (within 0.1%) and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 (0.3% ahead). The 1:1 FP16 ratio at 3.072 TFLOPS and PCIe 4.0 x8 interface suit mainstream integrated workloads.

The Intel Data Center GPU Max Subsystem wins in raw compute throughput and memory capacity. Its 52.43 TFLOPS FP32 output is more than 17 times the AMD part’s 3.072 TFLOPS. Its 128 GB HBM2e memory with 3.21 TB/s of bandwidth and 8,192-bit bus provide a memory subsystem no integrated GPU can approach. Its 16,384 shading units and 1,024 texture mapping units dwarf the Radeon 860M’s 512 and 32, respectively. The 128 ray tracing cores exceed the AMD part’s 8. The PCIe 5.0 x16 interface doubles the bus width of the AMD part’s PCIe 4.0 x8. The Intel part has no display outputs, so it cannot win in any graphics-output role; the AMD part has no discrete memory, so it cannot win in memory-bound data center workloads.

The database records no head-to-head wins for either part because no shared benchmarks exist. The recorded data instead shows two products engineered for opposite ends of the GPU spectrum: a 15 W integrated processor for portable devices and a 2,400 W data center subsystem for compute acceleration.