
Radeon 860M
Popular choices:

Radeon Sky 500
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook
This comparison brings together gaming FPS, raw graphics performance, VRAM, feature set, power efficiency, pricing context, and long-term value so you can see which GPU actually makes more sense.
Radeon 860M
2025Why buy it
- ✅More future proof: RDNA 3.5 (2024−2025) on 4nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
- ✅Draws 15W instead of 150W, a 135W reduction.
- ✅More future proof: RDNA 3.5 (2024−2025) on 4nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower average FPS than Radeon Sky 500 across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0 vs 9.4 G3D/$ (Unknown MSRP vs $500 MSRP).
Radeon Sky 500
2013Why buy it
- ✅44.4% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ✅Delivers 100+% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 9.4 vs 0 G3D/$ ($500 MSRP vs Unknown MSRP).
Trade-offs
- ❌Very weak future-proofing: 2013-era hardware with 2 GB of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
- ❌900% higher power demand at 150W vs 15W.
Radeon 860M
2025Radeon Sky 500
2013Why buy it
- ✅More future proof: RDNA 3.5 (2024−2025) on 4nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
- ✅Draws 15W instead of 150W, a 135W reduction.
- ✅More future proof: RDNA 3.5 (2024−2025) on 4nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
Why buy it
- ✅44.4% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ✅Delivers 100+% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 9.4 vs 0 G3D/$ ($500 MSRP vs Unknown MSRP).
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower average FPS than Radeon Sky 500 across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0 vs 9.4 G3D/$ (Unknown MSRP vs $500 MSRP).
Trade-offs
- ❌Very weak future-proofing: 2013-era hardware with 2 GB of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
- ❌900% higher power demand at 150W vs 15W.
Quick Answers
So, is Radeon 860M better than Radeon Sky 500?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper card?
Is Radeon Sky 500 still worth buying for gaming in 2026?
Games Benchmarks
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 9800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.

Path of Exile 2
| Preset | Radeon 860M | Radeon Sky 500 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 37 FPS | 80 FPS |
| medium | 23 FPS | 65 FPS |
| high | 17 FPS | 51 FPS |
| ultra | 9 FPS | 33 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 28 FPS | 67 FPS |
| medium | 16 FPS | 55 FPS |
| high | 9 FPS | 39 FPS |
| ultra | 5 FPS | 25 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 11 FPS | 24 FPS |
| medium | 7 FPS | 23 FPS |
| high | 4 FPS | 15 FPS |
| ultra | 3 FPS | 13 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Radeon 860M | Radeon Sky 500 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 95 FPS | 119 FPS |
| medium | 61 FPS | 89 FPS |
| high | 40 FPS | 68 FPS |
| ultra | 29 FPS | 43 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 62 FPS | 66 FPS |
| medium | 32 FPS | 45 FPS |
| high | 23 FPS | 33 FPS |
| ultra | 18 FPS | 23 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 25 FPS | 24 FPS |
| medium | 14 FPS | 17 FPS |
| high | 12 FPS | 13 FPS |
| ultra | 9 FPS | 9 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Radeon 860M | Radeon Sky 500 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 218 FPS | 213 FPS |
| medium | 174 FPS | 170 FPS |
| high | 145 FPS | 142 FPS |
| ultra | 109 FPS | 106 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 163 FPS | 159 FPS |
| medium | 131 FPS | 128 FPS |
| high | 109 FPS | 106 FPS |
| ultra | 82 FPS | 80 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 109 FPS | 106 FPS |
| medium | 87 FPS | 85 FPS |
| high | 72 FPS | 71 FPS |
| ultra | 49 FPS | 53 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Radeon 860M | Radeon Sky 500 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 149 FPS | 144 FPS |
| medium | 116 FPS | 113 FPS |
| high | 98 FPS | 97 FPS |
| ultra | 78 FPS | 80 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 103 FPS | 105 FPS |
| medium | 82 FPS | 85 FPS |
| high | 69 FPS | 73 FPS |
| ultra | 53 FPS | 56 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 62 FPS | 61 FPS |
| medium | 49 FPS | 46 FPS |
| high | 39 FPS | 36 FPS |
| ultra | 27 FPS | 25 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Radeon 860M and Radeon Sky 500

Radeon 860M
Radeon 860M
The Radeon 860M is manufactured by AMD. It was released in Marchar 2025. It features the RDNA 3.5 architecture. The core clock ranges from 600 MHz to 3000 MHz. It has 512 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 15W. Manufactured using 4 nm process technology. It features 8 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 4,838 points.

Radeon Sky 500
Radeon Sky 500
The Radeon Sky 500 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in March 27 2013. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 950 MHz. It has 1280 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 150W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 4,723 points.
Graphics Performance
The Radeon 860M scores 4,838 and the Radeon Sky 500 reaches 4,723 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.4% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon 860M is built on RDNA 3.5 while the Radeon Sky 500 uses GCN 1.0, both on 4 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 512 (Radeon 860M) vs 1,280 (Radeon Sky 500). Raw compute: 3.072 TFLOPS (Radeon 860M) vs 2.432 TFLOPS (Radeon Sky 500).
| Feature | Radeon 860M | Radeon Sky 500 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 4,838+2% | 4,723 |
| Architecture | RDNA 3.5 | GCN 1.0 |
| Process Node | 4 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 512 | 1280+150% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 3.072 TFLOPS+26% | 2.432 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 8 | 32+300% |
| TMUs | 32 | 80+150% |
| L1 Cache | 64 KB | 320 KB+400% |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB+100% | 0.5 MB |
| Frame Generation | FSR upscaling + RSR | FSR upscaling |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Radeon 860M | Radeon Sky 500 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR Upscaling / FSR 4 | FSR Upscaling / FSR 4 |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | AMD Anti-Lag | AMD Anti-Lag |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 2 GB of video memory. Bus width: System vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (Radeon 860M) vs 0.5 MB (Radeon Sky 500) — the Radeon 860M has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Radeon 860M | Radeon Sky 500 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 2 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory Type | Shared | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | System | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB+100% | 0.5 MB |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon 860M draws 15W versus the Radeon Sky 500's 150W — a 163.6% difference. The Radeon 860M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Radeon 860M) vs 350W (Radeon Sky 500). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | Radeon 860M | Radeon Sky 500 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 15W-90% | 150W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Perf/Watt | 322.5+924% | 31.5 |
Value Analysis
The Radeon 860M is the newer GPU (2025 vs 2013).
| Feature | Radeon 860M | Radeon Sky 500 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | — | $500 |
| Codename | Krackan Point | Pitcairn |
| Release | Marchar 2025 | March 27 2013 |
| Ranking | #449 | #455 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.












