AMD Radeon 860M vs AMD Radeon RX 7700 Comparison

The AMD Radeon 860M and AMD Radeon RX 7700 occupy opposite ends of the graphics spectrum, yet both come from the same manufacturer. The database records a single shared benchmark between them, and the results reveal a decisive performance gap. The RX 7700, a discrete add-in board, dominates the 860M, an integrated graphics processor. This analysis examines the recorded data to determine where each part fits, what architectural choices separate them, and what the limited benchmark overlap implies for real-world usage.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous. The AMD Radeon RX 7700 wins the only head-to-head benchmark recorded, the Geekbench OpenCL test, with a score of 106,028 against the AMD Radeon 860M’s 22,759. This represents a delta of -78.5% for the 860M, meaning the RX 7700 delivers roughly 4.66 times the raw compute performance in this specific workload. The RX 7700 also holds a higher average benchmark score of 15,852 across all its recorded tests, though this figure is skewed by its inclusion of multiple Passmark tests that score lower than the Geekbench OpenCL result.

The 860M, however, tells a different story through its percentile ranking. It sits at the 72nd percentile of all GPUs, while the RX 7700 sits at the 58th percentile. This counterintuitive ranking stems from the 860M’s two benchmark scores, both in Geekbench, which average 26,401. The RX 7700’s average of 15,852 is dragged down by its Passmark DirectX 9 score of 261 and Passmark G2D score of 1,206, which are not directly comparable to the 860M’s Geekbench results. The nearest rivals for each part clarify their positioning. The 860M trades blows with the NVIDIA GeForce MX550 (delta -0.1%), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 (delta 0.3%), and the AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary (delta -0.6%). The RX 7700 sits near the AMD Radeon R9 370X (delta -0.1%), the AMD Radeon RX 9060 (delta -1%), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti (delta -1.7%).

For users, the verdict is straightforward. The RX 7700 is the clear choice for any workload demanding high-throughput compute, such as heavy 3D rendering or large-scale data processing. The 860M, given its 15 W thermal design power and integrated nature, suits portable devices where power efficiency and minimal space take priority over raw performance. The data does not support the 860M for demanding tasks; it supports the RX 7700.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs stem from different generations of AMD’s RDNA architecture. The 860M uses RDNA 3.5, while the RX 7700 uses RDNA 3.0. This architectural gap is reflected in their process nodes. The 860M is built on TSMC’s 4 nm process, whereas the RX 7700 uses TSMC’s 5 nm process. The 860M carries the Krackan Point chip, part of the Navi III IGP (Strix Point Mobile) generation. The RX 7700 uses the Navi 32 chip, from the Navi III (RX 7000) generation, with the codename Wheat Nas.

Core counts differ dramatically. The 860M has 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, 16 raster operation units, and 8 ray tracing cores. The RX 7700 has 2,560 shading units, 160 texture mapping units, 96 raster operation units, and 40 ray tracing cores. The RX 7700 therefore has 5 times the shading units, 5 times the TMUs, 6 times the ROPs, and 5 times the ray tracing cores. The transistor count is equally lopsided. The RX 7700 packs 28,100 million transistors on a 346 mm² die, with a transistor density of 81.2 million per mm². The 860M’s transistor count and die size are recorded as unknown, so a direct density comparison is impossible.

Clock speeds show the 860M’s aggressive boost behavior. Its base clock is 600 MHz, but its boost clock reaches 3,000 MHz. The RX 7700 has a base clock of 1,900 MHz, a game clock of 2,041 MHz, and a boost clock of 2,459 MHz. The 860M’s boost clock exceeds the RX 7700’s boost clock by 541 MHz, yet this does not compensate for the massive core deficit. Memory configurations are fundamentally different. The 860M uses system shared memory, with system-dependent bandwidth. The RX 7700 has 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 624.1 GB/s of bandwidth.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data provides a clear split. The RX 7700 wins the only shared test, the Geekbench OpenCL workload, by a margin of 78.5%. Within its own benchmark suite, the RX 7700 shows strengths across different APIs. Its Passmark DirectX 9 score of 261 is its highest among the Passmark DirectX tests, while its DirectX 11 score of 186, DirectX 10 score of 92, and DirectX 12 score of 96 indicate a preference for older API workloads. Its Passmark G3D score of 20,974 and GPU compute score of 10,963 show solid general 3D and compute performance.

The 860M’s wins are less about absolute performance and more about efficiency and integration. Its 15 W TDP, versus the RX 7700’s 200 W TDP, positions it for devices where power draw is the limiting factor. The 860M is an IGP with no power connectors and a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface, while the RX 7700 is a dual-slot card requiring 2x 8-pin power connectors and a 550 W suggested power supply. The 860M’s boost clock of 3,000 MHz is a notable win in clock speed, but this does not translate into benchmark victories.

In the Geekbench Vulkan test, the 860M scores 30,043, which is higher than its OpenCL score of 22,759. This suggests the 860M handles Vulkan workloads better than OpenCL. The RX 7700 has no recorded Vulkan benchmark, so a direct comparison in that API is not possible. The RX 7700’s 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2,865 provides another data point for its DirectX 12 capability, a test the 860M does not appear in.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon 860M has a higher average benchmark score of 26,401, compared to the AMD Radeon RX 7700’s 15,852. This is because the 860M’s two recorded scores are both from Geekbench, while the RX 7700’s average includes several lower Passmark scores.

Q: What is the performance difference in the shared Geekbench OpenCL test?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7700 scores 106,028, while the AMD Radeon 860M scores 22,759. The 860M trails by 78.5%, indicating the RX 7700 delivers over four times the performance in this workload.

Q: How do the thermal design powers compare?

A: The AMD Radeon 860M has a TDP of 15 W, while the AMD Radeon RX 7700 has a TDP of 200 W. This makes the 860M suitable for power-constrained portable devices, while the RX 7700 requires a desktop power supply setup.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7700 has 2,560 shading units, compared to the AMD Radeon 860M’s 512 shading units. The RX 7700 has 5 times the shading unit count.

Q: What memory configuration does each GPU use?

A: The AMD Radeon 860M uses system shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth. The AMD Radeon RX 7700 uses 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus with 624.1 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What is the percentile ranking for each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon 860M ranks at the 72nd percentile of all GPUs, while the AMD Radeon RX 7700 ranks at the 58th percentile. This ranking reflects the mix of benchmark types recorded for each part.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records exactly one head-to-head benchmark between these two GPUs: Geekbench OpenCL. The AMD Radeon RX 7700 scores 106,028, and the AMD Radeon 860M scores 22,759. The delta percentage of -78.5% for the 860M is the single largest gap in this comparison. To put this in perspective, the 860M’s nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce MX550 (delta -0.1% from the 860M’s average) and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 (delta 0.3%). The RX 7700’s nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti (delta -1.7% from the RX 7700’s average). These rival deltas are small, often within a single percentage point, whereas the 860M versus RX 7700 gap is enormous.

The RX 7700 also records a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2,865, which is a modern DirectX 12 workload. The 860M has no comparable 3DMark result. In the RX 7700’s Passmark suite, its DirectX 9 score of 261 stands out as its best API-specific result, while its DirectX 12 score of 96 is its lowest. This pattern suggests the RX 7700 performs relatively better on legacy DirectX 9 workloads than on modern DirectX 12 ones, although all these scores are far below its OpenCL result.

For the 860M, its Geekbench Vulkan score of 30,043 exceeds its OpenCL score of 22,759 by roughly 32%. This indicates Vulkan is a stronger API for the 860M. The RX 7700 has no Vulkan score, so the 860M’s Vulkan advantage cannot be compared directly. The data shows that the RX 7700’s compute-oriented OpenCL performance is its dominant strength, while the 860M’s Vulkan performance is its relative strong suit within its limited benchmark set.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every recorded specification. The 860M uses a 4 nm process node, while the RX 7700 uses a 5 nm node. The 860M’s chip is Krackan Point, and the RX 7700’s chip is Navi 32. The RX 7700 has known transistor details: 28,100 million transistors on a 346 mm² die. The 860M’s transistor count and die size are unknown.

Clock specifications diverge sharply. The 860M has a base clock of 600 MHz and a boost clock of 3,000 MHz. The RX 7700 has a base clock of 1,900 MHz, a game clock of 2,041 MHz, and a boost clock of 2,459 MHz. The 860M’s boost clock is 541 MHz higher than the RX 7700’s boost clock. Memory differs completely: the 860M uses system shared memory, while the RX 7700 uses 16 GB of GDDR6 with a 256-bit bus and 624.1 GB/s bandwidth.

Compute resources are heavily skewed toward the RX 7700. It has 2,560 shading units versus 512, 160 TMUs versus 32, 96 ROPs versus 16, and 40 ray tracing cores versus 8. The pixel rate is 236.1 GPixel/s for the RX 7700 versus 48.00 GPixel/s for the 860M. Texture rates are 393.4 GTexel/s versus 96.00 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 25.18 TFLOPS for the RX 7700 versus 3.072 TFLOPS for the 860M, with both offering 1:1 FP16 rates at the same figures.

Power and physical characteristics also separate them. The 860M has a 15 W TDP, uses an IGP slot width, and has no power connectors. The RX 7700 has a 200 W TDP, uses a dual-slot design, requires 2x 8-pin power connectors, and has a suggested PSU of 550 W. The RX 7700 measures 267 mm in length, 135 mm in height, and 50 mm in width. The 860M has no recorded dimensions. The bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x8 for the 860M and PCIe 4.0 x16 for the RX 7700. Display outputs are portable-device dependent for the 860M, while the RX 7700 offers 1x HDMI 2.1a, 2x DisplayPort 2.1, and 1x USB Type-C. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Release dates differ, with the 860M appearing earlier in 2025 and the RX 7700 later in 2025. The 860M’s predecessor is Navi II IGP, and the RX 7700’s predecessor is Navi II, with the RX 7700’s successor listed as Navi IV.