AMD Radeon 860M vs NVIDIA H20 NVL16 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon 860M and NVIDIA H20 NVL16 occupy entirely different segments of the GPU market, and their benchmark data reflects this divide. The Radeon 860M is an integrated graphics processor built into the Krackan Point chip, designed for portable devices where power consumption is a primary constraint. Its recorded benchmarks show a Geekbench OpenCL score of 22,759 and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 30,043, placing it in the 72nd percentile of all GPUs in the database. The NVIDIA H20 NVL16, by contrast, is a server-grade accelerator with no benchmark entries in the database, an average benchmark score of zero, and a 50th percentile ranking. The database contains no head-to-head benchmark results between these two products, as they are not competing for the same workloads or use cases.

The Radeon 860M wins in the integrated graphics space, where its 15 W thermal design power and system-shared memory architecture make it suitable for thin-and-light laptops. Its 72nd percentile ranking indicates that it outperforms a majority of all recorded GPUs, despite being an IGP. The nearest rivals in the database, the NVIDIA GeForce MX550 at 26,421 average score and 0.1% ahead, and the AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary at 26,553 average score and 0.6% ahead, show that the 860M sits within a narrow performance band. The NVIDIA RTX A4000 is 1.1% ahead with an average score of 26,683, while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 trails by 0.3% with an average score of 26,331. These deltas are all within roughly one percent, indicating that the 860M's average benchmark score of 26,401 places it in a tightly contested cluster.

The H20 NVL16 wins in the server acceleration category, where its 96 GB of HBM3 memory, 4.03 TB/s memory bandwidth, and 312 tensor cores provide capabilities that the integrated Radeon cannot approach. The H20's 400 W thermal design power and SXM Module form factor confirm its data center orientation. With no benchmark scores recorded, the database cannot quantify its performance against the Radeon 860M, but the architectural specifications alone demonstrate a fundamental difference in purpose.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs use different manufacturing processes and architectures. The AMD Radeon 860M uses RDNA 3.5 architecture, fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC, and belongs to the Navi III IGP generation for Strix Point Mobile. The NVIDIA H20 NVL16 uses Hopper architecture, fabricated on a 5 nm process also at TSMC, and belongs to the Server Hopper generation. The H20's chip is the GH100, which contains 80,000 million transistors on an 814 mm² die, with a transistor density of 98.3 million per square millimeter. The Radeon 860M's transistor count and die size are not recorded in the database.

The compute resources differ substantially. The Radeon 860M has 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, 16 render output units, and 8 ray tracing cores. It does not list tensor cores. The H20 NVL16 has 9,984 shading units, 312 texture mapping units, 24 render output units, and 312 tensor cores, with no ray tracing core count recorded. The H20's FP32 throughput is 39.54 TFLOPS, while its FP16 throughput is 79.07 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio. The Radeon 860M delivers 3.072 TFLOPS for both FP32 and FP16 at a 1:1 ratio. This means the H20 provides roughly 12.9 times the FP32 throughput and approximately 25.7 times the FP16 throughput of the Radeon 860M.

Clock behavior also differs. The Radeon 860M has a base clock of 600 MHz and a boost clock of 3000 MHz. The H20 NVL16 runs at a base clock of 1830 MHz and a boost clock of 1980 MHz, with memory clocked at 1313 MHz or 5.3 Gbps effective. The Radeon's memory is system shared, so its bandwidth is system dependent, whereas the H20 uses dedicated HBM3 memory with a 6144-bit bus and 4.03 TB/s bandwidth.

The 860M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The H20 NVL16 has no API support recorded for DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan, consistent with its server accelerator role. The Radeon uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface and has no display outputs of its own, being portable device dependent. The H20 uses PCIe 5.0 x16 and has no display outputs at all.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute throughput?

A: The NVIDIA H20 NVL16 delivers 39.54 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, compared to the AMD Radeon 860M's 3.072 TFLOPS. The H20 leads by a factor of approximately 12.9.

Q: What are the memory configurations of these two GPUs?

A: The Radeon 860M uses system shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth. The H20 NVL16 has 96 GB of HBM3 memory on a 6144-bit bus, providing 4.03 TB/s of bandwidth.

Q: Do both GPUs support ray tracing?

A: The Radeon 860M includes 8 ray tracing cores. The H20 NVL16 does not have a recorded ray tracing core count in the database.

Q: How do the thermal design power ratings compare?

A: The Radeon 860M has a 15 W TDP, while the H20 NVL16 has a 400 W TDP. The H20 also lists a suggested power supply of 800 W.

Q: Which GPU is more recent in release date?

A: The Radeon 860M was released on February 28, 2025. The H20 NVL16 was released on September 1, 2025, making it the later release.

Q: What benchmark scores are recorded for each GPU?

A: The Radeon 860M has a Geekbench OpenCL score of 22,759 and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 30,043, with an average benchmark score of 26,401. The H20 NVL16 has no recorded benchmark scores and an average benchmark score of zero.

Specification Differences

The two products differ in nearly every recorded specification. The Radeon 860M uses a 4 nm process node, while the H20 NVL16 uses 5 nm. The H20's GH100 chip contains 80,000 million transistors on an 814 mm² die with a transistor density of 98.3 million per square millimeter; the Radeon's transistor count and die size are unknown. The Radeon has a base clock of 600 MHz and a boost clock of 3000 MHz, whereas the H20 runs at 1830 MHz base and 1980 MHz boost. Memory differs completely: the Radeon uses system shared memory, while the H20 has 96 GB of HBM3 on a 6144-bit bus with 4.03 TB/s bandwidth.

Compute unit counts diverge sharply. The Radeon has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, 16 ROPs, and 8 RT cores. The H20 has 9,984 shading units, 312 TMUs, 24 ROPs, and 312 tensor cores, with no RT core count. Pixel rates are similar: 48.00 GPixel/s for the Radeon versus 47.52 GPixel/s for the H20. Texture rates differ: 96.00 GTexel/s versus 617.8 GTexel/s. FP32 throughput is 3.072 TFLOPS versus 39.54 TFLOPS. FP16 throughput is 3.072 TFLOPS (1:1) versus 79.07 TFLOPS (2:1).

Power and form factor differ as well. The Radeon has a 15 W TDP, is an IGP, uses no power connectors, and has a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface. The H20 has a 400 W TDP, is an SXM Module, lists no power connectors, and uses PCIe 5.0 x16. Display outputs are portable device dependent for the Radeon and absent for the H20. API support: the Radeon supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4; the H20 has none recorded. The Radeon's predecessor is Navi II IGP, while the H20's predecessor is Server Ada and its successor is Server Blackwell.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results for the AMD Radeon 860M versus the NVIDIA H20 NVL16. This absence itself is informative: the two products are not designed to compete, and no common benchmark workload has been recorded for both.

Looking at the Radeon 860M's individual results, its Geekbench Vulkan score of 30,043 is notably higher than its Geekbench OpenCL score of 22,759. The Vulkan result indicates that the RDNA 3.5 architecture performs well under modern graphics APIs, while the OpenCL score reflects compute-oriented workloads. The average benchmark score of 26,401 places the 860M in the 72nd percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals in the database are all within a tight performance envelope: the NVIDIA GeForce MX550 is 0.1% ahead, the AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary is 0.6% ahead, the NVIDIA RTX A4000 is 1.1% ahead, and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 is 0.3% behind. These small deltas suggest that the 860M delivers performance comparable to a range of discrete mobile and workstation GPUs, despite being an integrated solution.

The H20 NVL16 has no recorded benchmark scores, so the database cannot provide quantitative comparisons. Its specifications, however, indicate a different performance class. The FP32 throughput of 39.54 TFLOPS and FP16 throughput of 79.07 TFLOPS are orders of magnitude above the Radeon's 3.072 TFLOPS in both precisions. The H20's 4.03 TB/s memory bandwidth dwarfs the system-dependent bandwidth of the Radeon's shared memory configuration. The H20's 312 tensor cores provide matrix acceleration capabilities absent from the Radeon's specification sheet.

Pixel rate is one area where the two are close: the Radeon 860M achieves 48.00 GPixel/s, while the H20 NVL16 achieves 47.52 GPixel/s. The Radeon is actually 1.0% ahead in this metric, likely due to its higher boost clock of 3000 MHz relative to the H20's 1980 MHz. Texture rate, however, heavily favors the H20: 617.8 GTexel/s versus 96.00 GTexel/s, a margin of roughly 6.4 times. These figures illustrate that the Radeon's strength lies in relatively simple pixel operations, while the H20 excels at texture-heavy and compute-intensive workloads.

The architectural records confirm the intended usage split. The Radeon 860M is an active production IGP with portable device dependent display outputs and a 15 W TDP, suited to battery-powered systems. The H20 NVL16 is an active production SXM Module with a 400 W TDP and an 800 W suggested power supply, suited to server installations with dedicated power delivery. The Radeon supports standard graphics APIs; the H20 lists none. The Radeon has 8 ray tracing cores; the H20 has none recorded. These are complementary products, not substitutes, and the database reflects this in the absence of overlapping benchmark data.