AMD Radeon 860M vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Comparison

The AMD Radeon 860M and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 occupy different ends of the hardware spectrum, one a compact integrated processor and the other a full-size discrete board. The recorded data shows a clear hierarchy in raw compute performance, but the two parts are built for fundamentally different operating envelopes. The Radeon 860M is an integrated graphics solution on the Krackan Point chip, while the RTX 4070 is a dual-slot discrete card from the GeForce 40-series. In the two common benchmarks captured in the database, the NVIDIA part wins both, with the AMD part trailing by a substantial percentage in each test. The average benchmark scores reinforce this gap: the Radeon 860M sits at 26,401 points, while the RTX 4070 reaches 37,648 points. The choice between them, based strictly on the available data, is a matter of system type and power constraints rather than a contest of comparable capabilities.

The Verdict

The data points to two distinct purchasing contexts. The AMD Radeon 860M is the only option for a low-power integrated system, as it carries a 15 W thermal design power and requires no additional power connectors. The RTX 4070, by contrast, is a 200 W dual-slot card that needs a 16-pin connector and a 550 W suggested power supply. For a portable device where the display output is dependent on the host hardware, the Radeon 860M fits naturally. For a desktop system with room for a 240 mm card and a dedicated power delivery path, the RTX 4070 delivers far higher scores.

The benchmark results are decisive. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RTX 4070 scores 154,858 compared to the Radeon 860M's 22,759, a margin of 85.3 percent. In Geekbench Vulkan, the RTX 4070 scores 174,152 versus 30,043, a margin of 82.7 percent. The RTX 4070 also holds a higher percentile ranking among all GPUs at 81, compared to the Radeon 860M's 72. Any user seeking maximum compute throughput should select the RTX 4070. Any user constrained to an integrated solution with no discrete graphics slot should select the Radeon 860M. The data does not suggest a middle ground.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different manufacturers, different chip designs, and different process nodes. The AMD Radeon 860M uses the Krackan Point chip built on RDNA 3.5 architecture, fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 uses the AD104 chip built on Ada Lovelace architecture, fabricated on a 5 nm process, also at TSMC. The transistor counts are not directly comparable: the AMD part's transistor count is listed as unknown, while the RTX 4070 contains 35,800 million transistors on a 294 mm² die with a density of 121.8 million transistors per square millimeter.

The compute configurations differ sharply. The Radeon 860M has 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, 16 render output units, and 8 ray tracing cores, with no tensor cores listed. The RTX 4070 has 5,888 shading units, 184 texture mapping units, 64 render output units, 46 ray tracing cores, and 184 tensor cores. Clock speeds also diverge. The Radeon 860M has a base clock of 600 MHz and a boost clock of 3000 MHz. The RTX 4070 has a base clock of 1920 MHz and a boost clock of 2475 MHz. The AMD part's higher boost clock does not compensate for its much smaller execution resource pool.

Memory architecture is another fundamental split. The Radeon 860M uses system shared memory, with the size, type, bus width, and bandwidth all listed as system dependent. The RTX 4070 has 12 GB of dedicated GDDR6X memory on a 192-bit bus, delivering 504.2 GB/s of bandwidth at an effective speed of 21 Gbps. The pixel and texture rates reflect this gap. The Radeon 860M reaches 48.00 GPixel/s and 96.00 GTexel/s. The RTX 4070 reaches 158.4 GPixel/s and 455.4 GTexel/s. Floating point throughput tells the same story: the Radeon 860M manages 3.072 TFLOPS in both FP32 and FP16, while the RTX 4070 delivers 29.15 TFLOPS in both.

The power and physical profiles are likewise opposite. The Radeon 860M is an integrated graphics processor with no slot width, no power connectors, and a 15 W thermal design power. The RTX 4070 is a dual-slot card measuring 240 mm in length, 110 mm in height, and 40 mm in width, with one 16-pin power connector and a 200 W thermal design power. The bus interface differs as well: the AMD part uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the NVIDIA part uses PCIe 4.0 x16. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The AMD part is currently marked as active in production, while the RTX 4070 is listed as end-of-life. The AMD part's release date is later, from late February 2025, compared to the RTX 4070's April 2023 release.

Where Each One Wins

The Radeon 860M wins in the category of system integration. As an IGP, it requires no separate card slot, no power connector, and no additional cooling beyond what the host portable device provides. Its 15 W power draw is a fraction of the RTX 4070's 200 W requirement. For a thin and light laptop or a compact portable device, the Radeon 860M is the only feasible choice among these two. The RTX 4070 cannot operate in such a system at all, given its dual-slot physical footprint and 16-pin connector.

The RTX 4070 wins decisively in every recorded performance benchmark. In Geekbench OpenCL, it delivers 154,858 points against the Radeon 860M's 22,759, a 85.3 percent advantage. In Geekbench Vulkan, it scores 174,152 versus 30,043, an 82.7 percent advantage. The RTX 4070 also has a higher average benchmark score across all tests in the database: 37,648 versus 26,401. Its percentile ranking among all GPUs stands at 81, against the Radeon 860M's 72. The RTX 4070 also offers dedicated memory in the form of 12 GB of GDDR6X, which removes the system memory contention that the shared-memory Radeon 860M must endure.

The RTX 4070 further wins on raw specification counts. It has more shading units, texture units, render output units, ray tracing cores, and tensor cores. Its memory bandwidth of 504.2 GB/s is a fixed value, whereas the Radeon 860M's bandwidth is dependent on the host system. The RTX 4070 also provides fixed display outputs with one HDMI 2.1 and three DisplayPort 1.4a connectors, while the Radeon 860M's display outputs are portable-device dependent.

The Radeon 860M does hold an advantage in production status and recency of release. The database lists it as active and released in early 2025, while the RTX 4070 is end-of-life and released in 2023. For a system builder avoiding end-of-life components, the Radeon 860M is the current part. The RTX 4070's predecessor is listed as GeForce 30 and its successor as GeForce 50, confirming its position in a completed product cycle.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 has an average benchmark score of 37,648, while the AMD Radeon 860M has an average benchmark score of 26,401.

Q: How much faster is the RTX 4070 in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The RTX 4070 scores 154,858 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 85.3 percent higher than the Radeon 860M's score of 22,759.

Q: What is the power requirement difference between the two?

A: The Radeon 860M has a thermal design power of 15 W and requires no power connectors. The RTX 4070 has a thermal design power of 200 W and requires one 16-pin power connector, with a suggested power supply of 550 W.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same graphics APIs?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: What memory does each GPU use?

A: The Radeon 860M uses system shared memory, with size and bandwidth dependent on the host system. The RTX 4070 has 12 GB of GDDR6X memory on a 192-bit bus with 504.2 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has the higher percentile ranking among all GPUs?

A: The RTX 4070 ranks at the 81st percentile, while the Radeon 860M ranks at the 72nd percentile.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains two direct head-to-head comparisons between the Radeon 860M and the RTX 4070. Both come from the Geekbench suite, one using the OpenCL API and the other using Vulkan. The RTX 4070 wins both, and the margins are large.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the RTX 4070 records a score of 154,858. The Radeon 860M records 22,759. The difference is 85.3 percent in favor of the NVIDIA part. This is the larger of the two deltas in the head-to-head set. The Radeon 860M's score of 22,759 is less than one-sixth of the RTX 4070's total. The OpenCL test exercises general compute workloads, and the RTX 4070's larger shading unit count and dedicated memory resources produce a commanding lead.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the RTX 4070 scores 174,152. The Radeon 860M scores 30,043. The delta is 82.7 percent in favor of the NVIDIA part. The Vulkan test is slightly closer than OpenCL in relative terms, but the absolute gap remains enormous. The Radeon 860M's Vulkan score is higher than its OpenCL score, suggesting the RDNA 3.5 architecture handles the Vulkan API relatively well, but it still trails the RTX 4070 by a wide margin.

The two wins give the RTX 4070 a clean 2-0 record in the head-to-head benchmarks. The Radeon 860M has zero wins. The average benchmark scores in the database corroborate the head-to-head results: the RTX 4070 sits at 37,648, and the Radeon 860M sits at 26,401. The RTX 4070's nearest rivals in the database, based on average score, include the NVIDIA Tesla P4 at 37,628, the AMD Radeon RX Vega 56 at 37,507, and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile at 38,135. The Radeon 860M's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce MX550 at 26,421, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 at 26,331, and the AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary at 26,553. These neighbor lists confirm that the Radeon 860M competes at a much lower performance tier than the RTX 4070.

The RTX 4070's additional benchmark records, beyond the two head-to-head tests, show consistency across different APIs. Its Passmark G3D score is 26,927, its Passmark GPU Compute score is 14,720, and its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score is 3,854. The Radeon 860M has no such additional records in the database, so the comparison rests on the two Geekbench tests. The RTX 4070's higher average benchmark score of 37,648, computed across its full benchmark set, reinforces its position. The Radeon 860M's average of 26,401, computed from its two Geekbench scores, places it 11,247 points below the RTX 4070's average.

The physical specifications explain much of the performance delta. The RTX 4070's 5,888 shading units and 184 texture mapping units dwarf the Radeon 860M's 512 shading units and 32 texture mapping units. The RTX 4070's 46 ray tracing cores and 184 tensor cores provide dedicated hardware that the Radeon 860M lacks entirely, as its tensor core count is listed as null. The RTX 4070's 29.15 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput is nearly ten times the Radeon 860M's 3.072 TFLOPS. The texture rate of 455.4 GTexel/s versus 96.00 GTexel/s and the pixel rate of 158.4 GPixel/s versus 48.00 GPixel/s round out the specification gap.

The memory situation compounds the compute disparity. The RTX 4070's 504.2 GB/s of bandwidth is fixed and dedicated. The Radeon 860M's bandwidth is listed as system dependent, meaning it shares the host's memory bus and competes with the CPU for bandwidth. The RTX 4070's 12 GB of GDDR6X is not shared with any other processor. The Radeon 860M's memory size is also system shared, so the effective capacity available to the GPU varies with the host configuration.

The production status and release timing offer the only areas where the Radeon 860M leads. The database marks the Radeon 860M as active, with a release date in early 2025. The RTX 4070 is marked as end-of-life, with a release date in April 2023 and a successor listed as GeForce 50. The RTX 4070's launch MSRP was 599 USD, a figure that can be stated once as a historical reference point. The Radeon 860M has no launch MSRP in the database. For a system builder prioritizing current-generation availability over performance, the Radeon 860M is the active part. For all performance metrics, the RTX 4070 is the clear leader. The data does not place these two in the same performance class, and the benchmark records confirm that classification with consistent, large margins.