AMD Radeon 860M vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 GB205 Comparison

FAQ

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in terms of average benchmark scores?

A: The AMD Radeon 860M has an average benchmark score of 26,401, while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 GB205 has no recorded benchmark scores in the database, resulting in an average score of 0. The database lists the RTX 5060 as a rival to the 860M with an average score of 26,331, a difference of 0.3% from the 860M.

Q: What is the difference in processing power between the two?

A: The AMD Radeon 860M delivers 3.072 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, whereas the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 GB205 delivers 19.18 TFLOPS. The RTX 5060 has 3,840 shading units compared to the 860M's 512 shading units.

Q: Which GPU has more ray tracing cores?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 GB205 has 30 ray tracing cores, while the AMD Radeon 860M has 8. The RTX 5060 also features 120 tensor cores, a specification that is absent for the 860M.

Q: How do the memory configurations differ?

A: The AMD Radeon 860M uses system-shared memory with bandwidth described as system dependent. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 GB205 has 8 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: What are the power requirements for each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon 860M has a TDP of 15 W and requires no power connectors. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 GB205 has a TDP of 145 W and uses a single 8-pin power connector, with a suggested power supply of 300 W.

Q: What is the launch date and MSRP for each product?

A: The AMD Radeon 860M was released on 2025-02-28 and has no launch MSRP recorded. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 GB205 has a launch date of 2026-05-31 and a launch MSRP of 299 USD.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon 860M and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 GB205 represent fundamentally different design philosophies. The 860M is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) built on the Krackan Point chip, using the RDNA 3.5 architecture. It belongs to the Navi III IGP generation for Strix Point Mobile and is manufactured on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The RTX 5060 GB205 is a discrete, dual-slot graphics card from the GeForce 50-series, built on the GB205 chip using the Blackwell 2.0 architecture. It is manufactured on a 5 nm process, also at TSMC.

The transistor counts and die sizes differ massively. The RTX 5060 contains 31,100 million transistors on a 263 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 118.3M per mm². The 860M's transistor count and die size are listed as unknown in the database. This disparity in raw silicon resources explains the large performance gap in compute specifications.

Clock behavior distinguishes the two as well. The 860M has a base clock of 600 MHz and a boost clock of 3000 MHz, a wide range typical of mobile integrated graphics that scale with thermal headroom. The RTX 5060 operates at a base clock of 2280 MHz and a boost clock of 2497 MHz, a much narrower range. Memory clocking also differs: the 860M relies on system shared memory with no dedicated clock, while the RTX 5060 uses a 1750 MHz memory clock with 28 Gbps effective speed.

The RTX 5060 includes 120 tensor cores, which the 860M lacks entirely. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The 860M connects via PCIe 4.0 x8, while the RTX 5060 uses PCIe 5.0 x8. Display outputs also differ: the 860M's outputs are portable device dependent, while the RTX 5060 has 1x HDMI 2.1b and 3x DisplayPort 2.1b.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark entries between the AMD Radeon 860M and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 GB205. However, the 860M has two recorded benchmark scores: 22,759 in Geekbench OpenCL and 30,043 in Geekbench Vulkan. The RTX 5060 has no recorded benchmarks in the database.

The nearest rival data provides context for the 860M's standing. The 860M's average benchmark score of 26,401 places it 0.3% ahead of the RTX 5060's listed average score of 26,331, a negligible difference. The 860M sits 0.1% below the NVIDIA GeForce MX550 (average score 26,421), 0.6% below the AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary (average score 26,553), and 1.1% below the NVIDIA RTX A4000 (average score 26,683). The 860M's percentile rank is 72, meaning it outperforms most GPUs in the database despite its integrated nature.

The compute specifications show a clear performance hierarchy. The RTX 5060 delivers 19.18 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, 6.2 times the 860M's 3.072 TFLOPS. Pixel rate for the RTX 5060 is 119.9 GPixel/s versus 48.00 GPixel/s for the 860M. Texture rate is 299.6 GTexel/s versus 96.00 GTexel/s. These figures indicate that in raw rasterization and compute workloads, the RTX 5060 holds a commanding lead.

The 860M's Vulkan score of 30,043 suggests it handles API-level workloads efficiently relative to its modest compute resources. Its OpenCL score of 22,759 is lower, indicating that compute-heavy tasks may not scale as well. The RTX 5060's lack of recorded benchmarks prevents a direct comparison, but the specification gap implies a significant performance advantage in most scenarios.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every measurable specification category.

Process and Die: The 860M uses a 4 nm process with unknown transistor count and die size. The RTX 5060 uses a 5 nm process with 31,100 million transistors and a 263 mm² die.

Clocks: The 860M has a 600 MHz base and 3000 MHz boost. The RTX 5060 has a 2280 MHz base and 2497 MHz boost. Memory clock for the 860M is system shared; for the RTX 5060 it is 1750 MHz with 28 Gbps effective.

Memory: The 860M uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth. The RTX 5060 has 8 GB GDDR7 on a 128-bit bus with 448.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Compute Units: The 860M has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The RTX 5060 has 3,840 shading units, 120 TMUs, and 48 ROPs.

Ray Tracing and Tensor Cores: The 860M has 8 RT cores and no tensor cores. The RTX 5060 has 30 RT cores and 120 tensor cores.

Rates: The 860M achieves 48.00 GPixel/s and 96.00 GTexel/s. The RTX 5060 achieves 119.9 GPixel/s and 299.6 GTexel/s. FP32 and FP16 are both 3.072 TFLOPS for the 860M, and both 19.18 TFLOPS for the RTX 5060.

Power and Cooling: The 860M has a 15 W TDP, is an IGP, and requires no power connectors. The RTX 5060 has a 145 W TDP, is dual-slot, uses a 1x 8-pin connector, and suggests a 300 W PSU.

Form Factor: The 860M has no recorded dimensions. The RTX 5060 measures 241 mm by 111 mm by 40 mm.

Bus and Outputs: The 860M uses PCIe 4.0 x8 with portable device dependent outputs. The RTX 5060 uses PCIe 5.0 x8 with 1x HDMI 2.1b and 3x DisplayPort 2.1b.

Release and Succession: The 860M released on 2025-02-28, succeeding the Navi II IGP. The RTX 5060 released on 2026-05-31, succeeding the GeForce 40 and preceding the GeForce 60.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear distinction: the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 GB205 is a discrete desktop-class GPU with substantially higher compute throughput, while the AMD Radeon 860M is an integrated solution designed for low-power mobile devices.

The RTX 5060 delivers 19.18 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, 3840 shading units, 120 tensor cores, and dedicated 8 GB GDDR7 memory with 448.0 GB/s bandwidth. Its 145 W TDP and dual-slot design reflect a component intended for desktop systems with adequate cooling and power delivery. The 5 nm process and 31,100 million transistors provide the physical resources for this performance level.

The 860M operates within a 15 W power envelope, making it suitable for portable devices where energy efficiency and thermal limits are priorities. Its 512 shading units and 8 RT cores are modest by comparison, but its 3.072 TFLOPS of FP32 performance is respectable for an integrated GPU. The 4 nm process and RDNA 3.5 architecture indicate a modern design focused on efficiency.

The database shows the 860M at the 72nd percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 26,401. Its nearest rival, the RTX 5060, has an average score of 26,331, placing them statistically even. This is notable because the RTX 5060's specifications suggest far greater raw power, yet the 860M holds its own in the aggregate benchmark metric recorded in the database.

Users requiring maximum graphics performance should select the RTX 5060, as its compute specifications are several times higher across all metrics. Users prioritizing portability and minimal power draw should select the 860M, which delivers functional performance within a 15 W budget and requires no external power connectors.

Where Each One Wins

AMD Radeon 860M Wins:

• Power efficiency: 15 W TDP versus 145 W TDP, making it suitable for thin-and-light devices.
• Integrated form factor: no slot width, no power connectors, no dimensions, allowing direct integration into portable systems.
• Boost clock headroom: 3000 MHz boost clock indicates aggressive scaling potential in thermally favorable conditions.
• Benchmark standing: 72nd percentile and an average score of 26,401, which is effectively tied with the RTX 5060's recorded average of 26,331.
• Release timing: available since 2025-02-28, over a year before the RTX 5060's 2026-05-31 launch.

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 GB205 Wins:

• Compute throughput: 19.18 TFLOPS FP32, over six times the 860M's 3.072 TFLOPS.
• Memory bandwidth: 448.0 GB/s dedicated GDDR7 versus system shared, system dependent bandwidth.
• Memory capacity: 8 GB dedicated versus system shared.
• Ray tracing and AI: 30 RT cores and 120 tensor cores versus 8 RT cores and no tensor cores.
• Pixel and texture rates: 119.9 GPixel/s and 299.6 GTexel/s versus 48.00 GPixel/s and 96.00 GTexel/s.
• Connectivity: PCIe 5.0 x8 and fixed display outputs (1x HDMI 2.1b, 3x DisplayPort 2.1b) versus PCIe 4.0 x8 and portable device dependent outputs.
• Physical resources: 31,100 million transistors on a 263 mm² die versus unknown values for the 860M.

The RTX 5060 is the choice for demanding workloads such as high-resolution gaming, content creation, and machine learning inference, where its tensor cores and memory bandwidth provide tangible advantages. The 860M is the choice for everyday computing, light gaming, and productivity tasks on battery-powered devices where the 15 W power draw and integrated design are decisive factors.