AMD Radeon 860M vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN Z Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark results split cleanly along API lines, with each card taking one discipline. In Geekbench OpenCL, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN Z posts 25,465 points against the AMD Radeon 860M's 22,759, a 10.6% advantage. This is the older compute workload, and the TITAN Z's raw shader throughput (5.046 TFLOPS FP32 versus 3.072 TFLOPS) shows up here. The 860M lags in OpenCL, but the margin is not catastrophic; it trails by roughly a tenth of the TITAN Z's score.

The reverse happens in Geekbench Vulkan, where the AMD Radeon 860M delivers 30,043 points versus the TITAN Z's 22,066. That is a 36.5% lead for the integrated part, a massive swing. The 860M's modern RDNA 3.5 architecture with 8 dedicated ray tracing cores and Vulkan 1.4 support simply outclasses the Kepler-based TITAN Z, which tops out at Vulkan 1.2.175 and has no ray tracing hardware at all. The 860M's advantage in this API is not marginal; it is a full third faster.

Looking at the aggregate, the AMD Radeon 860M averages 26,401 across both tests, placing it in the 72nd percentile of all GPUs in the database. The TITAN Z averages 23,736, sitting in the 69th percentile. The 860M's overall average is 11.2% higher than the TITAN Z's, even though it loses one head-to-head contest. This is because the Vulkan win is so large that it drags the average decisively in AMD's favor.

The nearest rivals in the database reinforce the story. The 860M sits within 1.1% of the NVIDIA RTX A4000 (26,683), within 0.6% of the AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary (26,553), and is essentially tied with the NVIDIA GeForce MX550 (26,421) and RTX 5060 (26,331). The TITAN Z, by contrast, is within 0.9% of the RTX 3070 Ti Mobile (23,518) and 1.4% of the RX 6800S (24,063), meaning its average score is competitive with much newer midrange mobile parts.

The Verdict

The choice between these two depends entirely on workload and platform constraints. The AMD Radeon 860M is a 4 nm integrated GPU from the Krackan Point chip, released in 2025, with a 15 W TDP. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN Z is a 28 nm discrete card from 2014, rated at 375 W, requiring a 750 W power supply and two 8-pin connectors. The data shows the 860M wins the modern API test by 36.5%, while the TITAN Z wins the legacy API test by 10.6%.

For anyone running current-generation games or Vulkan-based applications, the AMD Radeon 860M is the clear pick. It delivers 30,043 Vulkan points, a score that places it at the 72nd percentile overall, and it does so within a 15 W envelope. The TITAN Z cannot match this in Vulkan; its 22,066 points are 26.7% lower than the 860M's. The 860M is also an active product, while the TITAN Z is end-of-life with no successor in the GeForce 700 line beyond the GeForce 900 series.

For legacy OpenCL compute tasks, the TITAN Z retains a meaningful edge. Its 25,465 OpenCL points beat the 860M's 22,759 by 10.6%, and it offers 6 GB of dedicated GDDR5 memory with 336.0 GB/s bandwidth. The 860M relies on system shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth, which can be a bottleneck in memory-heavy workloads. The TITAN Z's 2880 shading units and 240 texture mapping units provide raw throughput that the 860M's 512 shaders and 32 TMUs cannot match in compute-bound OpenCL code.

The verdict is straightforward: the 860M is the modern choice for Vulkan and efficiency, while the TITAN Z is the legacy compute specialist. A user with a portable device and no power budget will prefer the 860M. A user with a triple-slot PCIe 3.0 slot, a 750 W power supply, and a workload that still relies on OpenCL will find the TITAN Z's 6 GB frame buffer and 5.046 TFLOPS more useful.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two recorded tests show a stark reversal of fortunes. In Geekbench OpenCL, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN Z scores 25,465 against the AMD Radeon 860M's 22,759. The delta is -10.6% from AMD's perspective, meaning the TITAN Z is 10.6% faster. This result aligns with the TITAN Z's hardware: 2880 shading units, 240 TMUs, and 48 ROPs produce a pixel rate of 52.56 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 210.2 GTexel/s. The 860M's 512 shaders, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs yield 48.00 GPixel/s and 96.00 GTexel/s. The TITAN Z's texture rate is more than double, which helps in compute-heavy OpenCL kernels.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the AMD Radeon 860M scores 30,043 against the TITAN Z's 22,066. The delta is +36.5% for AMD. This is the single largest margin in the head-to-head. The 860M's RDNA 3.5 architecture with 8 ray tracing cores and Vulkan 1.4 support is the likely cause. The TITAN Z's Kepler architecture from 2014 only supports Vulkan 1.2.175, and it has no ray tracing cores. The 860M's FP16 throughput matches its FP32 at 3.072 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio), which benefits modern graphics pipelines that use half-precision math. The TITAN Z has no listed FP16 performance, indicating a lack of dedicated half-rate support.

The aggregate average benchmark score for the 860M is 26,401, versus 23,736 for the TITAN Z. That is an 11.2% advantage for the integrated part. The 860M's percentile rank among all GPUs is 72, while the TITAN Z sits at 69. The nearest rival data places the 860M within 0.3% of the RTX 5060 (26,331) and 0.1% of the MX550 (26,421), showing that it trades blows with modern entry-level discrete cards. The TITAN Z's nearest rivals include the RTX 3080 Mobile (23,628) and RX 9070 (23,877), both within 0.6% of its average, which suggests its performance level is now comparable to recent midrange mobile parts despite its massive power draw.

The TITAN Z's OpenCL win is modest in percentage terms but represents real compute power. The 860M's Vulkan win is overwhelming. If a workload uses Vulkan, the 860M is over a third faster. If it uses OpenCL, the TITAN Z is about a tenth faster. The 860M's overall average is higher because the Vulkan margin dwarfs the OpenCL deficit.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon 860M averages 26,401 across both tests, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN Z averages 23,736. The 860M is 11.2% higher on average.

Q: Is the TITAN Z still competitive in any workload?

A: Yes, in Geekbench OpenCL the TITAN Z scores 25,465 versus the 860M's 22,759, a 10.6% advantage. It also offers 6 GB of dedicated GDDR5 memory with 336.0 GB/s bandwidth, which the 860M lacks.

Q: How large is the 860M's Vulkan advantage?

A: The 860M scores 30,043 in Geekbench Vulkan against the TITAN Z's 22,066, a 36.5% lead. This is the biggest single margin in the head-to-head.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The 860M is rated at 15 W TDP and uses no power connectors, while the TITAN Z is rated at 375 W TDP and requires two 8-pin connectors plus a 750 W suggested power supply.

Q: Which card supports newer graphics APIs?

A: The 860M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The TITAN Z supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175.

Q: How do their nearest rivals compare?

A: The 860M's average sits within 1.1% of the RTX A4000 and 0.6% of the RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary. The TITAN Z's average is within 0.9% of the RTX 3070 Ti Mobile and 1.4% of the RX 6800S.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is enormous, spanning over a decade of process and design evolution. The AMD Radeon 860M uses the RDNA 3.5 architecture on a 4 nm TSMC process, built as the Krackan Point chip under the Navi III IGP generation. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN Z uses the Kepler architecture on a 28 nm TSMC process, from the GeForce 700 generation. The transistor counts tell the story: the TITAN Z packs 7,080 million transistors on a 561 mm² die, giving a density of 12.6 million per mm². The 860M's transistor count and die size are unknown, but the 4 nm process implies a far higher density.

The TITAN Z has 2880 shading units, 240 TMUs, and 48 ROPs. The 860M has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. In raw numbers, the TITAN Z has 5.6 times more shading units and 7.5 times more TMUs. However, the 860M adds 8 ray tracing cores, which the TITAN Z lacks entirely. The TITAN Z's FP32 throughput is 5.046 TFLOPS, versus 3.072 TFLOPS for the 860M. But the 860M matches FP16 to FP32 at 3.072 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio), while the TITAN Z has no listed FP16 capability.

Memory is another stark contrast. The TITAN Z uses 6 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus, delivering 336.0 GB/s bandwidth. The 860M uses system shared memory with a system-dependent bus width and bandwidth. This means the TITAN Z has a massive bandwidth advantage in dedicated VRAM-bound tasks, while the 860M's performance depends on the host system's memory configuration. The TITAN Z's memory clock is 1750 MHz (7 Gbps effective), while the 860M's memory clock is listed as "System Shared."

The power envelope is the most dramatic difference. The 860M is a 15 W integrated GPU with no power connectors and a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface. The TITAN Z is a 375 W triple-slot card with two 8-pin connectors, a suggested 750 W power supply, and a PCIe 3.0 x16 interface. The TITAN Z measures 267 mm in length, 111 mm in height, and 62 mm in width. The 860M is an IGP with portable-device-dependent display outputs, meaning it fits in any laptop.

API support reflects the age gap. The 860M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The TITAN Z supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175. The 860M's newer feature set includes ray tracing and modern shader model support. The TITAN Z's display outputs are 2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, and 1x DisplayPort 1.2, while the 860M's outputs depend on the portable device.

Finally, production status and release timing differ. The 860M is active, released in 2025, with a predecessor in the Navi II IGP. The TITAN Z is end-of-life, released in 2014, with a predecessor in the GeForce 600 and a successor in the GeForce 900. The TITAN Z had a launch MSRP of 2,999 USD, while the 860M has no listed launch MSRP. These are two products from different eras, and the benchmark data reflects that split: the old card wins legacy compute, the new card wins modern graphics.