AMD Radeon 860M vs NVIDIA TITAN RTX Comparison

The NVIDIA TITAN RTX and AMD Radeon 860M occupy opposite ends of the GPU spectrum, and the recorded data reflects that gulf plainly. One is a dual-slot, 280 W desktop flagship built on a 754 mm² die; the other is a 15 W integrated GPU living inside a mobile processor package. Yet the database's percentile ranking places them closer than raw specifications would suggest, at the 76th and 72nd percentiles respectively across all GPUs. That apparent proximity is an artifact of the percentile metric, and the head-to-head benchmark results settle the question decisively: the TITAN RTX wins both shared tests, by margins of 352.9 and 536.5 percent. What follows is a breakdown of where each card's advantages actually lie.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

Only two tests overlap in the database for these two parts, and both are blowouts.

The first is Geekbench OpenCL. The TITAN RTX scores 144,858; the Radeon 860M scores 22,759. That is a delta of 536.5 percent, meaning the TITAN RTX delivers more than six times the throughput in this general-purpose compute workload. OpenCL results tend to track raw shader count, memory bandwidth, and driver maturity, and the TITAN RTX holds overwhelming advantages in every one of those categories: 4,608 shading units against 512, and 672.0 GB/s of dedicated GDDR6 bandwidth against system-dependent shared memory.

The second shared test is Geekbench Vulkan, where the TITAN RTX scores 136,073 to the 860M's 30,043, a 352.9 percent gap. The Vulkan result is the 860M's stronger relative showing: its score is roughly 32 percent as high as the TITAN's, compared with roughly 16 percent in OpenCL. The interpretation is straightforward. Graphics-adjacent workloads play to the 860M's high boost clock and modern RDNA 3.5 architecture, while pure compute exposes the limits of a 512-shader integrated design with no dedicated memory pool.

Beyond the direct overlap, the database's broader records sharpen the picture. The TITAN RTX posts a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 3,794, a Passmark G3D score of 20,491, and a Passmark GPU Compute score of 10,034. Its average benchmark score across all recorded tests is 31,676. The 860M's average benchmark score is 26,401, but note that its average is computed over only two tests, both Geekbench runs, so the two averages are not directly comparable in scope.

Context from each part's nearest rivals is more useful. The TITAN RTX sits within a rounding error of the NVIDIA RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell (0.5 percent), the Intel Arc Pro A30M (-0.7 percent), and a cluster including the NVIDIA GRID M60-1Q and Quadro M5000 (both 1.5 percent). The 860M's neighborhood includes the NVIDIA GeForce MX550 (-0.1 percent), the GeForce RTX 5060 (0.3 percent), the Radeon RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary (-0.6 percent), and the RTX A4000 (-1.1 percent). In other words, the 860M benches like an entry-level discrete laptop GPU, while the TITAN RTX benches in professional-desktop territory, and the head-to-head scores confirm the gap in practice.

Architecture Differences

These two parts could hardly be more architecturally distinct.

The TITAN RTX is built on the TU102 chip, NVIDIA's Turing architecture, part of the GeForce 20 generation. It is manufactured on TSMC's 12 nm process, packs 18,600 million transistors onto a 754 mm² die, and reaches a density of 24.7M transistors per mm². It launched on December 17, 2018, sits at end-of-life production status, and carried a launch MSRP of 2,499 USD. Its successor generation is GeForce 30 and its predecessor is GeForce 10.

The Radeon 860M is the graphics block of the Krackan Point chip, built on RDNA 3.5 and classified in the database under the Navi III IGP (Strix Point Mobile) generation. It is made on TSMC's 4 nm process, a far denser node, though transistor count and die size are unrecorded for this integrated part. It launched on February 28, 2025, remains in active production, and succeeded the Navi II IGP line.

The resource disparity is stark. The TITAN RTX fields 4,608 shading units, 288 TMUs, 96 ROPs, 72 RT cores, and 576 tensor cores. The 860M fields 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, 16 ROPs, and 8 RT cores, with no discrete tensor core count recorded. That works out to nine times the shading units, nine times the TMUs, six times the ROPs, and nine times the RT cores in the TITAN's favor.

Clocking strategies diverge just as sharply. The TITAN RTX runs a 1350 MHz base and 1770 MHz boost on a large, power-rich desktop die fed by 280 W of board power through two 8-pin connectors, with a suggested 600 W PSU. The 860M runs a 600 MHz base and a 3000 MHz boost within a 15 W envelope, with no power connectors at all. The high boost clock is the classic integrated-GPU compensation for a tiny shader array, and it is precisely why the 860M's Vulkan result holds up relatively better than its OpenCL result.

Memory is the other great divide. The TITAN RTX carries 24 GB of GDDR6 on a 384-bit bus at 14 Gbps effective, delivering 672.0 GB/s of bandwidth, with memory clocks listed at 1750 MHz. The 860M shares system memory entirely: size, type, bus width, and bandwidth are all system dependent. For any workload that streams large datasets, dedicated bandwidth is a structural advantage the integrated design cannot match.

Theoretical rates quantify the gap. The TITAN RTX manages 16.31 TFLOPS FP32, 32.62 TFLOPS FP16 at a 2:1 ratio, 169.9 GPixel/s of pixel fill, and 509.8 GTexel/s of texture fill. The 860M manages 3.072 TFLOPS FP32, the same 3.072 TFLOPS at FP16 owing to a 1:1 ratio, 48.00 GPixel/s, and 96.00 GTexel/s. That is roughly 5.3 times the FP32 compute and between 3.5 and 5.3 times the fill rates, depending on the metric.

Platform characteristics differ too. The TITAN RTX connects over PCIe 3.0 x16, occupies a dual-slot footprint measuring 267 mm long, 116 mm tall, and 35 mm wide, and offers one HDMI 2.0 output, three DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, and one USB Type-C. The 860M connects over PCIe 4.0 x8, is classified as an IGP with no card dimensions, and its display outputs are portable-device dependent. Both support an identical modern API set: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, which is notable given the six-plus year gap between launches.

Where Each One Wins

The TITAN RTX wins every benchmark in the shared dataset, so the split here is about scale of victory and the shape of each part's record rather than traded wins.

The TITAN RTX dominates compute. Its 536.5 percent OpenCL lead, backed by 576 tensor cores, a 10,034 Passmark GPU Compute score, and 24 GB of dedicated high-bandwidth memory, makes it the clear choice for GPU compute workloads recorded in the database. Its Passmark portfolio also spans DirectX 9, 10, 11, and 12 tests plus a G2D score of 860, giving it a far broader measured record: 3,794 in Steel Nomad DX12, 223 in DX9, 189 in DX11, 147 in DX10, and 88 in DX12.

The 860M's win is contextual rather than numerical. It is an active-production, 15 W integrated design requiring no power connectors, no slot, and no suggested PSU. Its benchmark neighborhood, essentially tied with the MX550 and within about one percent of the RTX 5060, RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary, and RTX A4000 on average score, indicates usable graphics capability without any discrete hardware at all. Its stronger relative Vulkan showing, at roughly a third of the TITAN's score versus roughly a sixth in OpenCL, suggests modern graphics APIs are where it holds up best.

The Verdict

The data supports a simple call. For anyone choosing raw performance, the TITAN RTX is the answer: it leads every shared benchmark, by 352.9 percent in Vulkan and 536.5 percent in OpenCL, with vastly greater shader counts, fill rates, compute throughput, and dedicated memory bandwidth. Buyers should note, however, that it is an end-of-life product with a 280 W TDP, a dual-slot 267 mm footprint, and a required 600 W PSU.

The Radeon 860M is not competing on that axis and the data does not pretend otherwise. It is a current, low-power integrated solution whose average score lands within about one percent of entry-level and mid-range discrete cards in the database's rankings. It belongs in thin-and-light mobile contexts where its 15 W envelope and zero-connector design matter more than benchmark supremacy.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in the shared benchmarks?

A: The NVIDIA TITAN RTX wins both. It scores 144,858 versus 22,759 in Geekbench OpenCL (536.5 percent faster) and 136,073 versus 30,043 in Geekbench Vulkan (352.9 percent faster).

Q: How do their percentile rankings compare across all GPUs?

A: The TITAN RTX sits at the 76th percentile and the Radeon 860M at the 72nd percentile in the database, a narrow gap that the head-to-head scores show is misleading given the different test mixes behind each figure.

Q: What are the key spec differences?

A: The TITAN RTX has 4,608 shading units, 72 RT cores, 576 tensor cores, 24 GB of GDDR6 on a 384-bit bus with 672.0 GB/s of bandwidth, and a 280 W TDP on a 12 nm process. The 860M has 512 shading units, 8 RT cores, shared system memory, and a 15 W TDP on a 4 nm process.

Q: Which GPUs does each one benchmark closest to?

A: The TITAN RTX's nearest rivals include the RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell (0.5 percent), Arc Pro A30M (-0.7 percent), GRID M60-1Q and Quadro M5000 (both 1.5 percent). The 860M's include the GeForce MX550 (-0.1 percent), RTX 5060 (0.3 percent), RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary (-0.6 percent), and RTX A4000 (-1.1 percent).

Q: Are both products still in production?

A: No. The TITAN RTX is end-of-life, having launched on December 17, 2018. The Radeon 860M is active, launched on February 28, 2025.

Q: Do they support the same graphics APIs?

A: Yes. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, despite the age difference between the two designs.