AMD Radeon 860M vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains two directly comparable benchmark results, and in both cases the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER holds a decisive lead. The largest margin appears in the Geekbench OpenCL test, where the NVIDIA part scores 199,267 points against the AMD Radeon 860M's 22,759 points. That is a delta of 775.6%, meaning the desktop GPU delivers more than eight times the raw compute throughput of the integrated solution in this workload. OpenCL exercises general-purpose GPU compute across a wide range of memory and shader operations, so this gap reflects the fundamental difference in scale between a 285 W discrete card and a 15 W integrated processor.

The Vulkan API benchmark narrows the field considerably, but the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER still wins by a wide margin. Its score of 53,683 eclipses the 30,043 posted by the Radeon 860M, a difference of 78.7%. Vulkan is a lower-overhead graphics API that can sometimes favor architectures with strong driver efficiency, yet the sheer compute and memory bandwidth advantages of the discrete NVIDIA part remain dominant. The delta here is smaller in relative terms than in OpenCL, which suggests the Radeon 860M's RDNA 3.5 architecture handles Vulkan's command and synchronization model relatively well, but it does not close the absolute performance gap.

Context from the wider database places both parts in different competitive tiers. The RTX 4070 Ti SUPER sits at the 76th percentile of all GPUs tracked, with an average benchmark score of 31,087. Its nearest rivals in the database are all NVIDIA professional and enthusiast cards: the Quadro M5000 at 31,206 (0.4% higher), the GRID M60-1Q at 31,220 (0.4% higher), the RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell at 31,532 (1.4% higher), and the TITAN RTX at 31,676 (1.9% higher). These deltas show that the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER is positioned just below the top tier of NVIDIA's older flagship and professional lineup, essentially trading blows with cards that once commanded far higher prices.

The Radeon 860M, by contrast, lands at the 72nd percentile with an average score of 26,401. Its nearest rivals are a mixed group: the GeForce MX550 at 26,421 (0.1% higher), the GeForce RTX 5060 at 26,331 (0.3% lower), the Radeon RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary at 26,553 (0.6% higher), and the RTX A4000 at 26,683 (1.1% higher). The RTX 5060 appearing as a near-peer is notable, as it suggests the integrated Radeon 860M is capable of matching a modern discrete entry-level GPU in aggregate database scores. However, the head-to-head results show that the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER is not merely a class above; it is several classes above, with margins that dwarf the differences seen among the 860M's own rivals.

Architecture Differences

The two products represent opposite ends of the GPU design spectrum. The RTX 4070 Ti SUPER is built on NVIDIA's Ada Lovelace architecture, fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The chip, designated AD103, contains 45,900 million transistors packed into a 379 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 121.1 million per square millimeter. This is a fully discrete, add-in board design with a triple-slot cooler and a 16-pin power connector. The AMD Radeon 860M uses the RDNA 3.5 architecture with a Krackan Point chip, built on TSMC's 4 nm node. It is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) belonging to the Navi III IGP generation for Strix Point Mobile, with no separate die size or transistor count recorded. The 4 nm process is more advanced than the 5 nm node, but the 860M is constrained by its integration into a mobile APU.

Compute resources differ by an order of magnitude. The RTX 4070 Ti SUPER deploys 8,448 shading units, 264 texture mapping units, and 96 ROPs, along with 66 ray tracing cores and 264 tensor cores. The Radeon 860M fields 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, with 8 ray tracing cores and no tensor core equivalent listed. Pixel and texture rates reflect this disparity: the NVIDIA part achieves 250.6 GPixel/s and 689.0 GTexel/s, while the AMD part manages 48.00 GPixel/s and 96.00 GTexel/s. Floating-point throughput tells a similar story. The RTX 4070 Ti SUPER delivers 44.10 TFLOPS in both FP32 and FP16 (with 1:1 ratio), while the Radeon 860M provides 3.072 TFLOPS in both formats. That is a 14-fold difference in raw shader math.

Memory architecture is another fundamental split. The RTX 4070 Ti SUPER carries 16 GB of GDDR6X on a 256-bit bus, producing 672.3 GB/s of bandwidth. The Radeon 860M uses system-shared memory, with the bus width and bandwidth marked as system dependent. This means the integrated GPU's performance can vary significantly based on the host system's memory configuration, a variable that does not exist for the discrete card. Clock speeds also differ: the NVIDIA GPU runs at a 2340 MHz base and 2610 MHz boost, while the AMD IGP starts at 600 MHz base and reaches 3000 MHz boost. The high boost clock on the 860M reflects its RDNA 3.5 design, but it cannot compensate for the vast difference in execution resources.

Feature sets show some convergence. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The RTX 4070 Ti SUPER includes tensor cores for AI acceleration, a feature absent from the Radeon 860M's specification list. Display output capabilities differ as well: the NVIDIA card provides 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a, while the AMD IGP's outputs are portable-device dependent. Bus interface also differs, with the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER using PCIe 4.0 x16 and the Radeon 860M using PCIe 4.0 x8.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins in OpenCL compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER wins decisively with a score of 199,267 versus the AMD Radeon 860M's 22,759, a delta of 775.6%.

Q: Is the Radeon 860M competitive in any benchmark against the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER?

A: The recorded data shows no competitive overlap. The NVIDIA part wins both head-to-head tests, with the smaller margin being 78.7% in Geekbench Vulkan.

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

A: The 860M's average score of 26,401 places it within 1.1% of several peers, including the GeForce MX550, GeForce RTX 5060, Radeon RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary, and RTX A4000. Its percentile rank is 72.

Q: What memory configuration does each GPU use?

A: The RTX 4070 Ti SUPER has 16 GB of dedicated GDDR6X memory on a 256-bit bus with 672.3 GB/s bandwidth. The Radeon 860M uses system-shared memory with bandwidth marked as system dependent.

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. The RTX 4070 Ti SUPER additionally features tensor cores for AI acceleration, which the Radeon 860M does not list.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The RTX 4070 Ti SUPER has a TDP of 285 W with a suggested 600 W power supply, while the Radeon 860M has a TDP of 15 W and is an integrated part with no power connectors.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every measurable specification. The RTX 4070 Ti SUPER uses a 5 nm process, whereas the Radeon 860M uses 4 nm. Transistor count is recorded at 45,900 million for the NVIDIA chip, with an unknown figure for the AMD part; die size is 379 mm² for the former and unknown for the latter. Clock speeds show a 2340 MHz base and 2610 MHz boost for NVIDIA, versus 600 MHz base and 3000 MHz boost for AMD. Memory is 16 GB GDDR6X on a 256-bit bus with 672.3 GB/s bandwidth for the discrete card, while the integrated part uses system-shared memory with dependent bandwidth.

Compute units differ markedly: 8,448 shading units, 264 TMUs, 96 ROPs, 66 RT cores, and 264 tensor cores for NVIDIA; 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, 16 ROPs, and 8 RT cores for AMD, with no tensor core listing. Pixel rate is 250.6 GPixel/s versus 48.00 GPixel/s, and texture rate is 689.0 GTexel/s versus 96.00 GTexel/s. FP32 and FP16 throughput are both 44.10 TFLOPS for NVIDIA and 3.072 TFLOPS for AMD. Power envelopes are 285 W versus 15 W. The NVIDIA card is triple-slot with a 16-pin connector and 600 W suggested PSU; the AMD IGP has no slot width beyond "IGP", no connectors, and no suggested PSU. Bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x16 versus PCIe 4.0 x8. Display outputs are 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a for NVIDIA, while AMD outputs are portable-device dependent. Production status is end-of-life for NVIDIA and active for AMD. Release dates are January 23, 2024, and February 28, 2025, respectively. The NVIDIA card has a launch MSRP of 799 USD; no MSRP is recorded for the AMD part.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 4070 Ti SUPER wins in every measured benchmark category. Its advantages are most pronounced in OpenCL compute, where the 775.6% delta reflects a massive lead in raw throughput. This makes it the clear choice for workloads that demand high floating-point performance, large memory bandwidth, or dedicated VRAM capacity. The 16 GB GDDR6X pool at 672.3 GB/s is suited for large datasets, high-resolution textures, and compute tasks that exceed the shared memory limits of an integrated GPU. Its tensor cores add AI acceleration capability that the Radeon 860M lacks entirely. The 285 W power envelope and triple-slot cooler indicate a product designed for sustained heavy loads in a desktop chassis.

The Radeon 860M's strengths lie outside raw performance. Its 15 W TDP and integrated form factor make it suitable for portable devices where power draw and physical space are constrained. The 4 nm process and 3000 MHz boost clock show architectural efficiency, and its 72nd percentile ranking against all GPUs indicates that it outperforms a substantial portion of the database, including some discrete mobile parts like the MX550. Its system-shared memory model allows flexibility, as bandwidth scales with the host system's memory configuration. For everyday graphics, light gaming, and media tasks in a laptop, the 860M provides a baseline experience without requiring a separate GPU.

The use-case split is therefore clear: the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER is for desktop systems where maximum performance, dedicated memory, and AI features are priorities. The Radeon 860M is for mobile integration where power efficiency and compactness trump absolute speed. The database does not record any benchmark where the 860M defeats the RTX 4070 Ti SUPER, so any scenario favoring the AMD part would be based on system-level constraints rather than measured GPU performance.