AMD Radeon 860M vs NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation Comparison

AMD Radeon 860M vs NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation

The benchmark data places these two GPUs in entirely different performance tiers. The NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation records an average benchmark score of 117,088, placing it in the 95th percentile of all GPUs, while the AMD Radeon 860M averages 26,401, sitting in the 72nd percentile. Across the two recorded head-to-head tests, the RTX 4000 SFF wins both, with the AMD part trailing by 81.8% in OpenCL and 72.5% in Vulkan. The RTX 4000 SFF is a workstation-class card with 20 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory, while the 860M is an integrated graphics processor sharing system memory, which explains the scale of the performance gap.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The OpenCL test delivers the largest margin of victory for the NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation. The RTX 4000 SFF scores 124,812 points against the Radeon 860M's 22,759, a delta of -81.8% for the AMD part. This means the NVIDIA card delivers roughly 5.5 times the OpenCL throughput of the integrated AMD solution. OpenCL workloads often stress raw compute throughput, and the RTX 4000 SFF has the hardware to dominate: 6,144 shading units, 192 texture mapping units, and 19.17 TFLOPS of FP32 performance.

The Vulkan test shows a somewhat narrower but still decisive gap. The RTX 4000 SFF records 109,364 points, while the Radeon 860M posts 30,043, a delta of -72.5%. The AMD part actually performs relatively better in Vulkan than in OpenCL, closing the percentage gap by 9.3 points, but it remains far behind in absolute terms. The Radeon 860M's Vulkan score is 32% higher than its own OpenCL score, suggesting the AMD driver stack or architecture handles Vulkan more efficiently relative to its own baseline.

In the context of their respective peer groups, both GPUs sit near the middle of their nearest rivals. The Radeon 860M's average score of 26,401 is within 1.1% of the NVIDIA RTX A4000 (26,683) and within 0.6% of the AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary (26,553). It even edges out the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 by 0.3% (26,331) and the NVIDIA GeForce MX550 by 0.1% (26,421). The RTX 4000 SFF, meanwhile, sits within 1.6% of the AMD Radeon PRO W7700 (118,976) and within 0.3% of the NVIDIA GB10 (117,393), while leading the NVIDIA Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB by 2.4% (114,395) and the NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile by 2.8% (113,944).

The RTX 4000 SFF's 95th percentile ranking versus the Radeon 860M's 72nd percentile underscores the class difference. In raw numbers, the NVIDIA card's average score is 4.43 times higher than the AMD part's average. The 20 GB of dedicated memory and 280.0 GB/s of bandwidth on the RTX 4000 SFF provide a structural advantage that the Radeon 860M's system-shared memory cannot match, particularly in memory-intensive compute tasks.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins in OpenCL performance?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation wins decisively, scoring 124,812 to the AMD Radeon 860M's 22,759, a difference of -81.8% for the AMD part.

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

A: The Radeon 860M's average score of 26,401 is effectively tied with the NVIDIA GeForce MX550 (26,421, -0.1%) and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 (26,331, +0.3%), while trailing the NVIDIA RTX A4000 by 1.1% (26,683).

Q: What is the memory configuration difference?

A: The RTX 4000 SFF has 20 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 160-bit bus with 280.0 GB/s bandwidth, whereas the Radeon 860M uses system-shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU ranks higher in the overall database percentile?

A: The RTX 4000 SFF ranks in the 95th percentile of all GPUs, while the Radeon 860M ranks in the 72nd percentile.

Q: Is the Radeon 860M competitive in any benchmark?

A: In Vulkan, the Radeon 860M scores 30,043, which is 32% higher than its own OpenCL score of 22,759, but it still trails the RTX 4000 SFF by 72.5% in that test.

Q: What is the thermal design power of each GPU?

A: The Radeon 860M has a TDP of 15 W, while the RTX 4000 SFF has a TDP of 70 W and a suggested PSU of 250 W.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from fundamentally different architectural lineages. The AMD Radeon 860M uses the RDNA 3.5 architecture on TSMC's 4 nm process, built around the Krackan Point chip. It belongs to the Navi III IGP generation for Strix Point Mobile, functioning as an integrated graphics processor. The NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation, by contrast, uses the Ada Lovelace architecture on TSMC's 5 nm process, built around the AD104 chip, and belongs to the Workstation Ada generation.

The compute resources differ by an order of magnitude. The Radeon 860M packs 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, 16 raster operation units, and 8 ray tracing cores, with no tensor cores listed. The RTX 4000 SFF carries 6,144 shading units, 192 TMUs, 64 ROPs, 48 ray tracing cores, and 192 tensor cores. The transistor counts reflect this scale: the RTX 4000 SFF uses 35,800 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, with a density of 121.8 million transistors per mm², while the Radeon 860M's transistor count and die size are listed as unknown.

Both GPUs support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API-level feature parity exists despite the hardware disparity. The Radeon 860M uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 bus interface, while the RTX 4000 SFF uses PCIe 4.0 x16. The clock behavior also differs sharply: the Radeon 860M boosts to 3000 MHz from a 600 MHz base, while the RTX 4000 SFF boosts to 1560 MHz from a 720 MHz base. The AMD part relies on a very high boost clock to extract performance from its smaller compute array.

The memory architecture is the most consequential difference. The Radeon 860M uses system-shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth, making its effective performance contingent on the host platform's memory subsystem. The RTX 4000 SFF uses 20 GB of dedicated GDDR6 on a 160-bit bus, delivering a fixed 280.0 GB/s of bandwidth. This distinction matters for sustained workloads, where dedicated memory bandwidth prevents contention with the CPU.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every specification field. The process nodes differ: AMD uses 4 nm, NVIDIA uses 5 nm, both from TSMC. The Radeon 860M has a base clock of 600 MHz and a boost clock of 3000 MHz, while the RTX 4000 SFF has a base clock of 720 MHz and a boost clock of 1560 MHz. The NVIDIA card's memory clock is listed at 1750 MHz with 14 Gbps effective speed, while the AMD part's memory clock is system-shared.

The memory subsystem shows the largest gap. The RTX 4000 SFF has 20 GB of GDDR6, a 160-bit bus, and 280.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Radeon 860M has system-shared memory, a system-shared bus width, and system-dependent bandwidth. Pixel and texture rates follow the same pattern: the RTX 4000 SFF delivers 99.84 GPixel/s and 299.5 GTexel/s, while the Radeon 860M delivers 48.00 GPixel/s and 96.00 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 19.17 TFLOPS for the NVIDIA card versus 3.072 TFLOPS for the AMD part.

The form factors are entirely different. The Radeon 860M is an IGP with no slot width and no power connectors, while the RTX 4000 SFF is a dual-slot card measuring 168 mm (6.6 inches) in length and 69 mm (2.7 inches) in height, with no power connectors and a suggested PSU of 250 W. The TDP difference is stark: 15 W for the AMD IGP versus 70 W for the NVIDIA card. Display outputs also differ, with the RTX 4000 SFF offering 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a, while the Radeon 860M's outputs are portable-device dependent.

The release dates are nearly two years apart: the Radeon 860M launched on 2025-02-28, while the RTX 4000 SFF launched on 2023-03-20. Both are listed as Active in production status. The NVIDIA card has a successor, Blackwell PRO W, and a predecessor in Workstation Ampere, while the Radeon 860M lists Navi II IGP as its predecessor and no successor.

The Verdict

The recorded data supports a clear verdict for compute-heavy workloads: the NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation is the superior GPU by every measured benchmark. Its average score of 117,088 versus 26,401 for the Radeon 860M represents a 4.43x advantage, and it wins both head-to-head tests by margins of 81.8% and 72.5%. The 95th percentile ranking versus 72nd percentile confirms the tier separation. The RTX 4000 SFF's 20 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory, 19.17 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, and 192 tensor cores make it suited for workstation-class tasks that demand sustained throughput.

The Radeon 860M, however, operates at 15 W TDP with no power connectors, compared to the RTX 4000 SFF's 70 W TDP and 250 W suggested PSU. The AMD part's 3000 MHz boost clock and system-shared memory make it a low-power integrated solution, not a discrete workstation card. Its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce MX550 and GeForce RTX 5060, both consumer-oriented parts, which places it in the entry-level IGP segment rather than the workstation tier.

The RTX 4000 SFF's nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon PRO W7700 and NVIDIA GB10, which are professional or high-end compute platforms. The data indicates the RTX 4000 SFF is appropriate for applications that need large dedicated memory pools and high FP32 throughput, while the Radeon 860M suits power-constrained mobile platforms where integrated graphics are the only option.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation wins in all measured benchmark categories. In OpenCL, it scores 124,812 against 22,759, a 5.48x advantage. In Vulkan, it scores 109,364 against 30,043, a 3.64x advantage. The NVIDIA card also wins on memory capacity (20 GB versus system-shared), memory bandwidth (280.0 GB/s versus system-dependent), FP32 compute (19.17 TFLOPS versus 3.072 TFLOPS), pixel rate (99.84 GPixel/s versus 48.00 GPixel/s), and texture rate (299.5 GTexel/s versus 96.00 GTexel/s).

The AMD Radeon 860M wins on power efficiency and integration. Its 15 W TDP is 78.6% lower than the RTX 4000 SFF's 70 W TDP. It requires no power connectors and is an IGP, meaning it occupies no expansion slot. Its boost clock of 3000 MHz is nearly double the RTX 4000 SFF's 1560 MHz, though this does not translate into compute wins given the smaller execution array. The Radeon 860M also has a smaller physical footprint, with no listed dimensions versus the RTX 4000 SFF's 168 mm length and 69 mm height.

For use-case selection, the data points to the RTX 4000 SFF for workstation tasks requiring dedicated memory, high FP32 throughput, and ray tracing (48 RT cores versus 8). The Radeon 860M fits mobile or low-power embedded platforms where the 15 W envelope and integrated form factor are priorities. The Radeon 860M's Vulkan score of 30,043 versus its OpenCL score of 22,759 indicates its driver stack handles Vulkan relatively well, but the absolute gap to the RTX 4000 SFF remains prohibitive for any performance-sensitive application.