AMD Radeon 860M vs NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark record splits cleanly between these two parts, and it is not a close contest. The AMD Radeon 860M records zero wins across the tested workloads, while the NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation takes both. The database shows a 2-0 sweep in favor of the workstation card, with the margin varying by API.

In OpenCL, the NVIDIA part posts a score of 146593 against the AMD's 22759, a delta of -84.5 percent for the Radeon. That is a crushing gap, one that places the two devices in entirely different performance strata. The Vulkan result is less lopsided but still decisive: the RTX 4000 Ada reaches 123842 while the 860M manages 30043, a -75.7 percent difference. The pattern indicates that the NVIDIA card dominates both compute-oriented and graphics-oriented synthetic loads, though its relative advantage narrows slightly in Vulkan.

For use-case positioning, the data suggests the Radeon 860M exists in a lower tier of absolute throughput. Its average benchmark score of 26401 places it at the 72nd percentile among all GPUs in the database. That is a respectable mid-pack standing, but it sits adjacent to parts like the NVIDIA GeForce MX550 (26421, -0.1 percent), the GeForce RTX 5060 (26331, +0.3 percent), the Radeon RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary (26553, -0.6 percent), and the RTX A4000 (26683, -1.1 percent). The 860M effectively trades blows with those products, none of which approach the RTX 4000 Ada's output.

The RTX 4000 Ada Generation, by contrast, holds a 95th percentile ranking. Its average score of 135218 places it alongside the NVIDIA A10M (135230, 0.0 percent), the AMD Radeon PRO W6800 (135396, -0.1 percent), the Radeon Pro W6800X Duo (135774, -0.4 percent), and the Radeon PRO V620 (136472, -0.9 percent). Those are workstation-class parts with substantial memory and compute resources. The performance spread between the 860M and the RTX 4000 Ada is roughly fivefold in average score, which is the fundamental takeaway from this comparison.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different design philosophies, reflected in their process nodes, chip sizes, and feature sets. The AMD Radeon 860M uses the Krackan Point chip built on RDNA 3.5 architecture, fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC. It belongs to the Navi III IGP generation for Strix Point Mobile, and it is an integrated graphics processor with no standalone slot width, no power connectors, and a bus interface of PCIe 4.0 x8. Its transistor count and die size are listed as unknown in the database, a common situation for integrated parts where those figures are not publicly disclosed.

The NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation uses the AD104 chip on Ada Lovelace architecture, built on a 5 nm process at the same foundry. This is a discrete workstation card with 35,800 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 121.8 million per square millimeter. It occupies a single slot, draws power through a single 16-pin connector, and uses a PCIe 4.0 x16 interface. The database also lists a suggested PSU of 300 W for the NVIDIA part, while the AMD IGP draws its power entirely from the host system.

Memory configuration separates the two sharply. The Radeon 860M uses system-shared memory, with the bus width, type, and bandwidth all marked as system-dependent. This means its memory performance scales with the host laptop's RAM configuration, a variable that the database cannot fix. The RTX 4000 Ada has a fixed 20 GB of GDDR6 on a 160-bit bus, delivering 360.0 GB/s of bandwidth. That dedicated memory pool is a structural advantage for sustained workloads, as it does not compete with the CPU for bandwidth.

Compute resources also differ by an order of magnitude. The Radeon 860M has 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, 16 ROPs, and 8 ray tracing cores. The RTX 4000 Ada has 6144 shading units, 192 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 48 RT cores, plus 192 tensor cores, which the AMD part lacks entirely. The resulting pixel rate is 48.00 GPixel/s for the AMD versus 139.2 GPixel/s for the NVIDIA, and texture rate is 96.00 GTexel/s versus 417.6 GTexel/s. FP32 throughput is 3.072 TFLOPS for the Radeon and 26.73 TFLOPS for the RTX card, a 8.7x difference. Both support FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with their FP32 figures.

Clock behavior reveals another structural difference. The Radeon 860M boosts to 3000 MHz from a 600 MHz base, a very wide frequency range typical of a power-constrained IGP. The RTX 4000 Ada runs at a 1500 MHz base and 2175 MHz boost, a narrower range on a 130 W TDP. The AMD part is rated at 15 W, which explains its ability to reach high clocks only in short bursts. The NVIDIA card's higher sustained clocks, combined with far more execution units, produce the benchmark gap.

Both parts support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API compatibility is not a differentiator. Display outputs differ: the Radeon 860M is portable-device dependent, while the RTX 4000 Ada offers 4x DisplayPort 1.4a. The NVIDIA card's release date is 2023-08-08, with the AMD part following on 2025-02-28. The RTX 4000 Ada's predecessor is Workstation Ampere and its successor is Blackwell PRO W, while the 860M succeeds Navi II IGP.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The OpenCL result is the single largest defeat for the AMD part. The Radeon 860M scores 22759, while the RTX 4000 Ada posts 146593. That is a -84.5 percent delta, meaning the NVIDIA card delivers more than six times the OpenCL throughput. OpenCL is often used for compute workloads like rendering and physics simulation, and this margin suggests the RTX 4000 Ada is in a different league for those tasks. The AMD part's score sits close to its nearest rivals, including the MX550 at 26421 and the RTX 5060 at 26331, confirming that the 860M is competitive with entry-level discrete parts but nowhere near workstation silicon.

The Vulkan test narrows the gap somewhat but does not change the outcome. The Radeon 860M scores 30043, nearly 32 percent higher than its own OpenCL result, which indicates the RDNA 3.5 architecture responds well to Vulkan's lower-overhead API. The RTX 4000 Ada scores 123842 in Vulkan, which is lower than its OpenCL figure of 146593, a reversal of the AMD part's behavior. The delta is -75.7 percent in favor of NVIDIA, still a massive margin but one that shows the 860M is relatively stronger in Vulkan. This could matter for games that use Vulkan, where the AMD IGP would be less disadvantaged than in compute-oriented OpenCL workloads.

The database's average benchmark score, which combines both tests, puts the Radeon 860M at 26401 and the RTX 4000 Ada at 135218. That is a 5.1x difference in average throughput. The head-to-head table records zero wins for the AMD part and two for the NVIDIA part, with no test where the Radeon comes out ahead. The closest the AMD gets is the Vulkan result, but even there it trails by more than 75 percent.

It is worth comparing each part to its own nearest rivals to contextualize the head-to-head. The Radeon 860M's average score of 26401 is essentially tied with the MX550's 26421 and slightly ahead of the RTX 5060's 26331, but behind the RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary's 26553 and the RTX A4000's 26683. The RTX 4000 Ada's 135218 is within one percent of the A10M's 135230 and within a tenth of a percent of the PRO W6800's 135396. So both parts sit at the expected level for their respective classes, but those classes are far apart.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation, with an average score of 135218 versus 26401 for the AMD Radeon 860M. The NVIDIA part sits at the 95th percentile of all GPUs, while the AMD part is at the 72nd percentile.

Q: How large is the performance gap in OpenCL?

A: The RTX 4000 Ada scores 146593 in OpenCL against 22759 for the Radeon 860M, a -84.5 percent delta. This is the larger of the two head-to-head margins.

Q: Does the Radeon 860M perform better in Vulkan than in OpenCL?

A: Yes. The 860M scores 30043 in Vulkan versus 22759 in OpenCL, a relative improvement of about 32 percent. The RTX 4000 Ada shows the opposite pattern, scoring 123842 in Vulkan versus 146593 in OpenCL.

Q: What memory configurations do these parts use?

A: The Radeon 860M uses system-shared memory with bandwidth marked as system dependent. The RTX 4000 Ada has 20 GB of GDDR6 on a 160-bit bus with 360.0 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: How do the shading unit counts compare?

A: The RTX 4000 Ada has 6144 shading units, while the Radeon 860M has 512. The NVIDIA part also has 192 tensor cores, which the AMD part does not list at all.

Q: What are the TDP ratings?

A: The Radeon 860M is rated at 15 W, while the RTX 4000 Ada is rated at 130 W. The database lists a suggested PSU of 300 W for the NVIDIA card.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear separation of roles. The AMD Radeon 860M is an integrated part designed for power-constrained mobile systems, with a 15 W TDP, system-shared memory, and no discrete slot or power connectors. Its benchmark results place it in the same band as entry-level discrete GPUs like the MX550 and RTX 5060, and it is competitive with those parts within a few percentage points. For a laptop that needs basic 3D acceleration without a dedicated graphics chip, the 860M's 72nd percentile standing is reasonable.

The NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation is a workstation accelerator with 20 GB of dedicated GDDR6, 192 tensor cores, and a 130 W TDP. Its 95th percentile ranking and 5.1x average score advantage over the 860M reflect a fundamentally different purpose: sustained compute and professional graphics workloads that demand high throughput and large memory capacity. The nearest rivals for the RTX 4000 Ada are all workstation or datacenter parts, including the A10M and the Radeon PRO W6800, which reinforces its positioning.

For anyone choosing between these two, the deciding factor is the host system. The 860M cannot be installed in a desktop; it is an IGP that ships inside a mobile processor. The RTX 4000 Ada is a single-slot discrete card that requires a PCIe 4.0 x16 slot and a 16-pin power connector. The performance gap in the database, while enormous, is secondary to the physical incompatibility. The benchmark record simply quantifies what the architectures imply: the RTX 4000 Ada wins every tested workload by a wide margin, and the Radeon 860M competes only with lower-tier discrete parts.