AMD Radeon 880M vs AMD Radeon HD 8850M Comparison

The AMD Radeon 880M and AMD Radeon HD 8850M represent two very different eras of mobile graphics, and the recorded data shows a clear generational gap. The 880M, built on RDNA 3.5 architecture, is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) for modern Strix Point mobile systems, while the HD 8850M is an older discrete GPU based on GCN 1.0 from the Solar System (HD 8800M) generation. Their benchmark results and specifications tell a story of architectural evolution, but the comparison is not purely one-sided. The database contains only one common benchmark test for these two GPUs, Geekbench OpenCL, but the surrounding data on their capabilities, memory systems, and feature sets provides a comprehensive picture. This analysis explores where each GPU wins, what the numbers imply, and who should choose which based strictly on the recorded measurements.

Where Each One Wins

The straightforward answer from the head-to-head data is that the AMD Radeon 880M wins the only direct benchmark comparison available. In Geekbench OpenCL, the 880M scores 31,285, while the HD 8850M scores 7,447. This represents a 320.1% advantage for the 880M, a massive margin that reflects the difference in compute capability and architecture. The 880M’s FP32 performance is listed at 4.454 TFLOPS, whereas the HD 8850M delivers 800.0 GFLOPS. That is a 5.5x difference in raw floating-point throughput, which explains the overwhelming OpenCL result.

However, the HD 8850M does have its own domain where it holds an advantage: memory architecture. The HD 8850M features 2 GB of dedicated GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing 64.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The 880M, in contrast, uses System Shared memory with a bus width and bandwidth listed as "System Dependent". This means the HD 8850M has a fixed, dedicated memory pool that does not compete with the CPU for bandwidth, a characteristic that can benefit certain workloads in a real system, even if the raw compute is far lower. The database does not include a benchmark that isolates this advantage, so it remains a qualitative consideration.

The 880M also wins on feature support. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), Vulkan 1.4, and has 12 ray tracing cores, while the HD 8850M is limited to DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170, with no ray tracing support. In modern gaming and compute workloads that leverage these APIs, the 880M is the clear winner. The HD 8850M’s only recorded benchmark is Geekbench OpenCL, and its percentile ranking among all GPUs is 40, compared to the 880M’s 43rd percentile. This indicates that while the 880M is not a high-end part, it sits above the HD 8850M in overall performance distribution.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear verdict: the AMD Radeon 880M is the superior GPU for almost any purpose. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 31,285 versus 7,447 is a 320.1% difference, and its average benchmark score of 8,436 dwarfs the HD 8850M’s 7,447. The 880M also has a higher percentile ranking at 43 versus 40, meaning it outperforms a larger fraction of all GPUs in the database. The 880M’s nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX (avg score 8,427, delta 0.1%) and the AMD Radeon R9 M375X (avg score 8,325, delta 1.3%), placing it in the company of older mid-range discrete GPUs. The HD 8850M’s nearest rivals, such as the Intel UHD Graphics 750 (avg score 7,441, delta 0.1%) and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 (avg score 7,472, delta -0.3%), show it competing with integrated graphics and low-end discrete parts.

Who should pick the HD 8850M? Only a user constrained to legacy hardware, such as someone with a 2013-era laptop that cannot accept a newer GPU, would have any reason to rely on it. Its end-of-life production status and lack of modern API support (no DirectX 12 Ultimate, no ray tracing) make it unsuitable for current software. The 880M, being an active product from 2024, is the obvious choice for new systems. Its 15 W TDP and IGP form factor make it power-efficient, and its performance in the database suggests it can handle modern workloads that the HD 8850M cannot. The verdict is unambiguous: the 880M wins on compute, features, and longevity.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct head-to-head benchmark in the database is Geekbench OpenCL. The AMD Radeon 880M scores 31,285, and the AMD Radeon HD 8850M scores 7,447. The delta is 320.1% in favor of the 880M. This is not a marginal win; it is a dominant performance gap. To put it in context, the 880M’s nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX, has an average score of 8,427, which is only 0.1% away from the 880M’s average of 8,436. The HD 8850M’s nearest rival, the Intel UHD Graphics 750, has an average score of 7,441, just 0.1% above the HD 8850M’s 7,447. This means the HD 8850M is competing at the level of modern integrated graphics, while the 880M is competing with older discrete GPUs.

The 880M’s other benchmark scores provide further evidence of its capabilities. In Geekbench Vulkan, it scores 40,006, and in Passmark G3D, it scores 7,615. These are not directly comparable to the HD 8850M, which has no recorded scores for those tests, but they show a GPU that excels in both compute and rasterization. The 880M’s Passmark GPU Compute score of 3,719 and its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 535 (low but present) indicate support for modern workloads. The HD 8850M has no such data, making it impossible to assess its performance in those areas, but the absence itself is telling: it likely was not tested because it lacks the required features.

The 880M’s texture rate of 139.2 GTexel/s and pixel rate of 46.40 GPixel/s are far above the HD 8850M’s 25.00 GTexel/s and 10.00 GPixel/s. In fill-rate-bound scenarios, the 880M would be roughly 5.5x faster in pixel output and 5.6x faster in texture output, aligning with the FP32 difference. These numbers reinforce the OpenCL result and suggest the 880M would win every graphical benchmark if more were recorded.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher Geekbench OpenCL score?

A: The AMD Radeon 880M scores 31,285, while the AMD Radeon HD 8850M scores 7,447. The 880M wins by 320.1%.

Q: Does the HD 8850M have any advantage over the 880M?

A: The HD 8850M has 2 GB of dedicated GDDR5 memory with a 128-bit bus and 64.00 GB/s bandwidth, whereas the 880M relies on System Shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth. This gives the HD 8850M a fixed memory pool, but no benchmark in the database demonstrates a performance benefit from this.

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

A: The 880M has an average benchmark score of 8,436, and the HD 8850M has an average of 7,447. The 880M’s average is 13.3% higher.

Q: Which GPU supports ray tracing?

A: Only the AMD Radeon 880M supports ray tracing, with 12 ray tracing cores. The HD 8850M has no ray tracing cores listed.

Q: What DirectX versions do these GPUs support?

A: The 880M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the HD 8850M supports DirectX 12 (11_1). The 880M also supports Vulkan 1.4, versus Vulkan 1.2.170 for the HD 8850M.

Q: How do these GPUs rank among all GPUs in the database?

A: The 880M is in the 43rd percentile, and the HD 8850M is in the 40th percentile. The 880M outperforms a larger share of the GPU population.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is substantial. The AMD Radeon 880M is built on the RDNA 3.5 architecture with a chip named Strix Point, manufactured on a 4 nm process at TSMC. It contains 34,000 million transistors on a 233 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 145.9M per mm². The HD 8850M uses the GCN 1.0 architecture with a Venus chip, manufactured on a 28 nm process, with 1,500 million transistors on a 123 mm² die, giving a density of 12.2M per mm². This is a 12x difference in transistor density, reflecting the generational leap in manufacturing.

The 880M features 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, along with 12 ray tracing cores. The HD 8850M has 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, with no ray tracing cores. The 880M’s clock speeds range from a base of 400 MHz to a boost of 2900 MHz, while the HD 8850M runs at a base of 575 MHz and a boost of 625 MHz. The 880M’s higher boost clock, combined with its larger shader count, drives its FP32 performance to 4.454 TFLOPS, versus 800.0 GFLOPS for the HD 8850M. The 880M also supports FP16 at a 1:1 ratio, a feature the HD 8850M lacks (FP16 is listed as null).

The memory systems are fundamentally different. The 880M uses System Shared memory, meaning it draws from the system’s main RAM, with the bus width and bandwidth dependent on the host platform. The HD 8850M has dedicated 2 GB GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus with 64.00 GB/s bandwidth. This gives the HD 8850M a predictable memory performance, but its overall compute is far lower. The 880M’s bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x8, while the HD 8850M uses PCIe 3.0 x16. The 880M is an IGP with no power connectors and a 15 W TDP, whereas the HD 8850M’s TDP is not listed.

Specification Differences

The specification differences between the two GPUs are extensive, covering every major component. The process node: 4 nm for the 880M versus 28 nm for the HD 8850M. Transistors: 34,000 million versus 1,500 million. Die size: 233 mm² versus 123 mm². Transistor density: 145.9M per mm² versus 12.2M per mm². Clock speeds: the 880M has a base of 400 MHz and a boost of 2900 MHz, while the HD 8850M has a base of 575 MHz and a boost of 625 MHz. Memory: the 880M uses System Shared memory with no dedicated size, type, bus width, or bandwidth (all listed as System Shared or System Dependent), while the HD 8850M has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 64.00 GB/s bandwidth.

Shading units: 768 for the 880M versus 640 for the HD 8850M. TMUs: 48 versus 40. ROPs: 16 for both. Ray tracing cores: 12 for the 880M, none for the HD 8850M. Pixel rate: 46.40 GPixel/s versus 10.00 GPixel/s. Texture rate: 139.2 GTexel/s versus 25.00 GTexel/s. FP32: 4.454 TFLOPS versus 800.0 GFLOPS. FP16: 4.454 TFLOPS (1:1) for the 880M, null for the HD 8850M. TDP: 15 W for the 880M, null for the HD 8850M. Bus interface: PCIe 4.0 x8 versus PCIe 3.0 x16. DirectX support: 12 Ultimate (12_2) versus 12 (11_1). Vulkan support: 1.4 versus 1.2.170. Production status: Active versus End-of-life. Release date: 2024-07-14 versus 2013-03-31. Predecessor: Navi II IGP versus London. Successor: null versus Gem System. The 880M’s display outputs are listed as Portable Device Dependent, while the HD 8850M has null for this field. These differences paint a picture of a modern, power-efficient IGP versus a legacy discrete GPU from over a decade ago.