Radeon PRO W7700 vs GeForce GTX 860M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 860M with Radeon PRO W7700, including specs and performance data.

GTX 860M
2014
4 GB GDDR5, 75 Watt
7.90

PRO W7700 outperforms GTX 860M by a whopping 531% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking51561
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data55.87
Power efficiency7.2918.16
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2017)RDNA 3.0 (2022−2024)
GPU code nameGM107Navi 32
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date13 January 2014 (10 years ago)13 November 2023 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$999

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores1152 or 6403072
Core clock speed797 MHz1900 MHz
Boost clock speed1085 MHz2600 MHz
Number of transistors1,870 million28,100 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt190 Watt
Texture fill rate43.40499.2
Floating-point processing power1.389 TFLOPS31.95 TFLOPS
ROPs1696
TMUs40192
Ray Tracing Coresno data48

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Laptop sizemedium sizedno data
Bus supportPCI Express 2.0, PCI Express 3.0no data
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)PCIe 4.0 x16
Lengthno data241 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x 8-pin
SLI options+-

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount4 GB16 GB
Standard memory configurationGDDR5no data
Memory bus width128 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speedUp to 2500 MHz2250 MHz
Memory bandwidth80.0 GB/s576.0 GB/s
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display ConnectorsNo outputs4x DisplayPort 2.1
eDP 1.2 signal supportUp to 3840x2160no data
LVDS signal supportUp to 1920x1200no data
VGA аnalog display supportUp to 2048x1536no data
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) supportUp to 3840x2160no data
HDMI+-
HDCP content protection+-
7.1 channel HD audio on HDMI+-
TrueHD and DTS-HD audio bitstreaming+-

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder+-
Optimus+-
Ansel+-

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12 (11_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.16.7
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.12.2
Vulkan1.1.1261.3
CUDA+-

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

GTX 860M 7.90
PRO W7700 49.83
+531%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

GTX 860M 3047
PRO W7700 19227
+531%

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

900p91
−504%
550−600
+504%
Full HD36
−511%
220−230
+511%
4K14
−507%
85−90
+507%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data4.54
4Kno data11.75

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
−525%
75−80
+525%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18−20
−479%
110−120
+479%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−12
−491%
65−70
+491%
Battlefield 5 21−24
−509%
140−150
+509%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16−18
−525%
100−105
+525%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
−525%
75−80
+525%
Far Cry 5 18−20
−511%
110−120
+511%
Far Cry New Dawn 21−24
−491%
130−140
+491%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
−477%
300−310
+477%
Hitman 3 14−16
−500%
90−95
+500%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50
−522%
280−290
+522%
Metro Exodus 21−24
−509%
140−150
+509%
Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
−491%
130−140
+491%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 24−27
−515%
160−170
+515%
Watch Dogs: Legion 55−60
−525%
350−400
+525%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18−20
−479%
110−120
+479%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−12
−491%
65−70
+491%
Battlefield 5 21−24
−509%
140−150
+509%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16−18
−525%
100−105
+525%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
−525%
75−80
+525%
Far Cry 5 18−20
−511%
110−120
+511%
Far Cry New Dawn 21−24
−491%
130−140
+491%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
−477%
300−310
+477%
Hitman 3 14−16
−500%
90−95
+500%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50
−522%
280−290
+522%
Metro Exodus 21−24
−509%
140−150
+509%
Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
−491%
130−140
+491%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 24−27
−515%
160−170
+515%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 60
−483%
350−400
+483%
Watch Dogs: Legion 55−60
−525%
350−400
+525%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18−20
−479%
110−120
+479%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−12
−491%
65−70
+491%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16−18
−525%
100−105
+525%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
−525%
75−80
+525%
Far Cry 5 18−20
−511%
110−120
+511%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
−477%
300−310
+477%
Hitman 3 14−16
−500%
90−95
+500%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50
−522%
280−290
+522%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 24−27
−515%
160−170
+515%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12
−525%
75−80
+525%
Watch Dogs: Legion 55−60
−525%
350−400
+525%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
−491%
130−140
+491%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
−500%
90−95
+500%
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14
−525%
75−80
+525%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 8−9
−525%
50−55
+525%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 3−4
−500%
18−20
+500%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8−9
−525%
50−55
+525%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−500%
24−27
+500%
Far Cry 5 9−10
−511%
55−60
+511%
Forza Horizon 4 30−33
−500%
180−190
+500%
Hitman 3 10−12
−491%
65−70
+491%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
−488%
100−105
+488%
Metro Exodus 10−11
−500%
60−65
+500%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
−471%
40−45
+471%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
−471%
40−45
+471%
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55
−500%
300−310
+500%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
−515%
80−85
+515%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 7−8
−471%
40−45
+471%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
−500%
30−33
+500%
Hitman 3 4−5
−500%
24−27
+500%
Horizon Zero Dawn 27−30
−507%
170−180
+507%
Metro Exodus 5−6
−500%
30−33
+500%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
−500%
30−33
+500%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
−500%
30−33
+500%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 3−4
−500%
18−20
+500%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−500%
18−20
+500%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−500%
6−7
+500%
Far Cry 5 4−5
−500%
24−27
+500%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
−511%
55−60
+511%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 3−4
−500%
18−20
+500%
Watch Dogs: Legion 3−4
−500%
18−20
+500%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
−525%
50−55
+525%

This is how GTX 860M and PRO W7700 compete in popular games:

  • PRO W7700 is 504% faster in 900p
  • PRO W7700 is 511% faster in 1080p
  • PRO W7700 is 507% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 7.90 49.83
Recency 13 January 2014 13 November 2023
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 16 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 190 Watt

GTX 860M has 153.3% lower power consumption.

PRO W7700, on the other hand, has a 530.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 460% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon PRO W7700 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 860M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 860M is a notebook card while Radeon PRO W7700 is a workstation one.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce GTX 860M
GeForce GTX 860M
AMD Radeon PRO W7700
Radeon PRO W7700

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.7 439 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 860M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.8 4 votes

Rate Radeon PRO W7700 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.