AMD Radeon 860M vs NVIDIA P106-100 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive sweep for the NVIDIA P106-100 across the two shared benchmark tests. In Geekbench OpenCL, the P106-100 scores 35,951 against the AMD Radeon 860M's 22,759, a margin of 36.7% in favor of the NVIDIA card. That is a substantial gap, placing the P106-100 far ahead in compute-heavy OpenCL workloads. The Radeon 860M does not close the gap in Vulkan either, where the P106-100 posts 32,897 versus 30,043, a narrower but still clear 8.7% advantage.

The average benchmark scores tell a more nuanced story. The Radeon 860M holds an average score of 26,401 across its two recorded tests, while the P106-100 averages 23,249 across three tests. This discrepancy matters: the P106-100's average is dragged down by a single 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 899, a test the Radeon 860M does not appear in. When comparing only the overlapping Geekbench tests, the P106-100 wins both. However, the Radeon 860M's overall percentile ranking is higher at 72nd versus 68th for the P106-100, suggesting that its strong Vulkan showing and the absence of a weak DX12 result bolster its standing in the broader database.

Looking at the nearest rivals for each card provides context. The Radeon 860M sits within 1.1% of the NVIDIA GeForce MX550, the RTX 5060, the RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary, and the RTX A4000, with deltas ranging from -1.1% to +0.3%. That cluster indicates the 860M is competitive with a midrange laptop-class GPU and even some desktop parts from previous generations. The P106-100, by contrast, is effectively tied with the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 (0.0% delta) and within 0.3% of the RX 6600M and R9 M290X. Its nearest rival list shows no single dominant competitor, meaning the P106-100 sits in a crowded performance band.

The head-to-head results are unambiguous: the P106-100 wins both recorded matchups. Yet the Radeon 860M's higher average score and better percentile suggest that its performance profile is more balanced, while the P106-100 excels specifically in OpenCL and Vulkan but stumbles in DX12. For users prioritizing raw compute in those two APIs, the P106-100 is the clear pick. For a more consistent all-around score across different workloads, the Radeon 860M appears stronger in the aggregate.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different eras and design philosophies. The AMD Radeon 860M is built on TSMC's 4 nm process, using the RDNA 3.5 architecture with the Krackan Point chip, part of the Navi III IGP generation for Strix Point Mobile. It is an integrated graphics processor, meaning it shares system memory and has no dedicated VRAM. Its 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 raster operation units are paired with 8 ray tracing cores. The boost clock reaches 3000 MHz from a 600 MHz base, yielding 3.072 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and an identical 3.072 TFLOPS for FP16, indicating a 1:1 ratio. The GPU supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Its power draw is just 15 W, and it connects via PCIe 4.0 x8, with display outputs dependent on the portable device.

The NVIDIA P106-100 is a fundamentally different product. It uses the 16 nm GP106 chip with the Pascal architecture, classified under Mining GPUs. It is a discrete card with 6 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 192-bit bus, delivering 192.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The memory clock runs at 2002 MHz, with 8 Gbps effective speed. The chip packs 1,280 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 48 ROPs, with no ray tracing cores. Base clock is 1506 MHz, boosting to 1709 MHz, producing 4.375 TFLOPS of FP32 performance. FP16 is drastically lower at 68.36 GFLOPS, a 1:64 ratio, reflecting Pascal's compute focus on FP32. It supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Power consumption is 120 W, requiring a 1x 6-pin connector and a 300 W power supply. The card is dual-slot, 250 mm long, and has no display outputs, as it was designed for mining. Its PCIe interface is limited to PCIe 1.0 x16.

The process node difference is stark: 4 nm versus 16 nm. That alone explains much of the efficiency gap, with the Radeon 860M drawing 15 W versus 120 W for the P106-100. The transistor counts tell the story as well: the P106-100 has 4,400 million transistors on a 200 mm² die, a density of 22.0 million per mm². The Radeon 860M's transistor count and die size are unknown, but the 4 nm node allows for a far more power-efficient design. The Radeon 860M also adds ray tracing hardware, which the P106-100 lacks entirely. Memory architecture differs fundamentally: the 860M uses system shared memory with bandwidth described as system dependent, while the P106-100 has dedicated GDDR5 with fixed bandwidth. The Radeon 860M supports newer APIs, including DirectX 12 Ultimate, whereas the P106-100 caps at DirectX 12 (12_1). The P106-100's lack of display outputs is a critical limitation, as it cannot drive a monitor without a secondary GPU.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear choice based on workload and system context. The NVIDIA P106-100 wins both head-to-head benchmarks, with a 36.7% lead in OpenCL and an 8.7% lead in Vulkan. For users running compute tasks in those APIs, the P106-100 is measurably faster. Its dedicated 6 GB GDDR5 memory with 192.2 GB/s bandwidth also provides a fixed, predictable memory performance, unlike the system-dependent bandwidth of the Radeon 860M. The P106-100's 4.375 TFLOPS of FP32 compute exceeds the Radeon 860M's 3.072 TFLOPS, reinforcing its compute advantage.

However, the Radeon 860M is not without merits. Its average benchmark score is 13.5% higher than the P106-100's (26,401 versus 23,249), and it ranks in the 72nd percentile versus the 68th. This suggests that in the full database of results, the 860M performs more consistently across a variety of tests. The Radeon 860M is also an integrated GPU with a 15 W power draw, making it suitable for thin-and-light laptops, whereas the P106-100 is a 120 W dual-slot card with no display outputs, effectively requiring a desktop system with a separate graphics solution for video output. The Radeon 860M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate and ray tracing, features entirely absent on the P106-100.

For a portable device where power efficiency and modern API support matter, the Radeon 860M is the only viable choice. For a mining rig or a compute-focused desktop where display output is unnecessary and raw OpenCL/Vulkan performance is paramount, the P106-100 delivers superior results. The P106-100 is also end-of-life, while the Radeon 860M is active and released in early 2025, meaning driver support and longevity favor the AMD part. Neither card has a launch MSRP in the database, so no price comparison is possible. The verdict hinges on use case: the P106-100 wins on raw benchmark performance in the two shared tests, but the Radeon 860M wins on efficiency, modern features, and overall score consistency.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The NVIDIA P106-100 scores 35,951 versus the AMD Radeon 860M's 22,759, a 36.7% advantage for the P106-100.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon 860M beat the NVIDIA P106-100 in any benchmark?

A: No. The P106-100 wins both shared tests: Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan, with deltas of 36.7% and 8.7% respectively.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon 860M averages 26,401 across two tests, while the NVIDIA P106-100 averages 23,249 across three tests, including a low 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 899.

Q: Does the NVIDIA P106-100 support ray tracing?

A: No. The P106-100 has no ray tracing cores, while the AMD Radeon 860M includes 8 ray tracing cores.

Q: Can the NVIDIA P106-100 connect to a display?

A: No. The P106-100 has no display outputs, whereas the Radeon 860M's display outputs are portable device dependent.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The AMD Radeon 860M draws 15 W, while the NVIDIA P106-100 draws 120 W and requires a 1x 6-pin power connector and a 300 W power supply.

Where Each One Wins

AMD Radeon 860M wins on efficiency and integration. The 15 W power draw versus 120 W makes it suitable for portable devices. It is an IGP with no power connectors, fitting into thin laptops. Its 4 nm process node versus 16 nm gives it a massive efficiency lead. The 860M also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4, matching the P106-100's Vulkan version but exceeding its DirectX feature level. Its 8 ray tracing cores provide hardware acceleration that the P106-100 cannot offer. The 860M's average benchmark score is higher at 26,401 versus 23,249, and its 72nd percentile ranking beats the P106-100's 68th. For systems where space, power, and modern API support are priorities, the 860M is the clear winner.

NVIDIA P106-100 wins on raw compute performance. It leads the 860M by 36.7% in OpenCL and 8.7% in Vulkan. Its 4.375 TFLOPS of FP32 compute outstrips the 860M's 3.072 TFLOPS. The dedicated 6 GB GDDR5 memory with 192.2 GB/s bandwidth provides consistent, high-speed memory access, unlike the system-shared memory of the 860M, whose bandwidth is system dependent. The P106-100 also has more shading units (1,280 versus 512), more TMUs (80 versus 32), and more ROPs (48 versus 16), contributing to its higher pixel rate of 82.03 GPixel/s versus 48.00 GPixel/s and texture rate of 136.7 GTexel/s versus 96.00 GTexel/s. For compute-heavy tasks in OpenCL and Vulkan, especially in mining or headless compute environments, the P106-100 delivers superior performance.

The use-case split is stark. The Radeon 860M is for modern laptops and portable devices that need a capable integrated GPU with ray tracing and low power draw. The P106-100 is for desktop systems with a separate display adapter, prioritizing raw compute throughput over efficiency and features. The P106-100's end-of-life status and lack of display outputs make it a niche product, while the 860M's active production and 2025 release date ensure ongoing relevance. Users who need the highest scores in the two shared benchmarks should choose the P106-100; users who need a balanced, efficient, and modern GPU should choose the Radeon 860M.