GPU Comparison

The AMD Radeon 780M and AMD Radeon Pro 560 are separated by seven years of architecture evolution, yet their average benchmark scores land within 0.2% of each other. The 780M wins the head-to-head comparison 2–0, but the Pro 560 remains competitive in specific legacy workloads. The data shows a clear generational split: the RDNA 3.0 integrated part dominates modern API tests, while the GCN 4.0 discrete part holds its own only in Metal-based environments. The 780M’s 20% OpenCL lead and 107.5% Vulkan advantage are decisive, but the Pro 560’s dedicated 4 GB GDDR5 memory and 128-bit bus keep it relevant for older software ecosystems.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon 780M is the clear winner in compute-heavy, modern API workloads. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 18602 against the Pro 560’s 15504 represents a 20% advantage, and the Vulkan gap is far larger: 33683 versus 16232, a 107.5% margin. This makes the 780M the obvious choice for DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan applications, where its RDNA 3.0 architecture and 12 dedicated ray tracing cores provide capabilities the Pro 560 simply lacks. The 780M also posts a higher Geekbench Vulkan score than any benchmark available for the Pro 560, reinforcing its dominance in cross-platform graphics APIs.

The AMD Radeon Pro 560 wins in exactly one measurable area: Geekbench Metal. Its score of 20918 exceeds the 780M’s best available score in that test, though the 780M has no Metal benchmark listed. This indicates the Pro 560 retains an edge in Apple’s Metal framework, which is expected given its generation is explicitly labeled "Radeon Pro Mac (500 Series)." For macOS-centric workflows that rely on Metal, the Pro 560’s dedicated memory configuration, 4 GB GDDR5 with 81.28 GB/s bandwidth, provides a stable foundation that the 780M’s system-shared memory cannot match in consistency, even if the 780M’s raw compute is superior.

The average benchmark scores tell a story of near-parity: the 780M averages 17588, and the Pro 560 averages 17551, a delta of just 0.2%. Both GPUs sit at the 61st percentile among all GPUs. The Pro 560’s nearest rivals include the NVIDIA Tesla K40c at 17468 (0.5% behind) and the Radeon Pro 460 at 17509 (0.2% behind), while the 780M’s rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 at 17639 (0.3% ahead) and the Radeon HD 7790 at 17666 (0.4% ahead). This clustering shows both parts occupy the same performance tier, but the 780M achieves it with a fraction of the power envelope.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide is stark. The 780M uses the Phoenix chip on TSMC’s 4 nm process, packing 25,390 million transistors into a 178 mm² die. The Pro 560 uses the Polaris 21 chip on GlobalFoundries’ 14 nm process, with just 3,000 million transistors on a 123 mm² die. That translates to a transistor density of 142.6 million per mm² for the 780M versus 24.4 million per mm² for the Pro 560, a 5.8x density advantage for the newer part. The 780M’s RDNA 3.0 architecture supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, while the Pro 560’s GCN 4.0 architecture tops out at DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3.

Core counts favor the Pro 560 in raw quantity: 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The 780M counters with 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. However, the 780M’s higher clock speeds, 800 MHz base and 2900 MHz boost, dramatically outweigh the Pro 560’s unspecified clock rates. The 780M delivers 8.909 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 139.2 GTexel/s texture rate, compared to the Pro 560’s 1.858 TFLOPS and 58.05 GTexel/s. The 780M also has 12 ray tracing cores, a feature entirely absent from the Pro 560. Power consumption tells the opposite story: the 780M is rated at 15 W TDP, while the Pro 560 draws 75 W, a 5x difference.

Memory architecture is fundamentally different. The 780M uses system-shared memory with bandwidth described as "System Dependent," meaning performance scales with the host system’s RAM. The Pro 560 has dedicated 4 GB GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, providing a fixed 81.28 GB/s bandwidth. The Pro 560’s memory clock is listed at 1270 MHz (5.1 Gbps effective), while the 780M’s memory clock is "System Shared." This makes the Pro 560 more predictable in memory-constrained scenarios, but the 780M’s compute advantage compensates in most synthetic benchmarks.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data shows two tests where both GPUs have matching benchmark entries. In Geekbench OpenCL, the 780M scores 18602 against the Pro 560’s 15504, a 20% win. This is a substantial margin that reflects the 780M’s 8.909 TFLOPS FP32 throughput versus the Pro 560’s 1.858 TFLOPS, a 4.8x raw compute difference that the benchmark partially captures. The OpenCL result is closer than the raw FLOPs suggest, likely because the Pro 560’s dedicated memory reduces latency, but the 780M still wins decisively.

Geekbench Vulkan is the 780M’s most lopsided victory: 33683 versus 16232, a 107.5% delta. This more than doubles the Pro 560’s score, demonstrating the 780M’s superior Vulkan driver implementation and architecture efficiency. The 780M’s support for Vulkan 1.4 versus the Pro 560’s 1.3 partially explains the gap, but the sheer compute advantage is the dominant factor. The 780M’s nearest rival in this metric is the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060, which sits only 0.3% above the 780M in average score, showing the 780M punches well above its 15 W TDP class.

The Pro 560’s only benchmark win is Geekbench Metal, where it scores 20918. The 780M has no Metal benchmark listed, so this cannot be directly compared. However, the Pro 560’s Metal score exceeds its own OpenCL score by 35%, indicating strong Metal optimization. The 780M’s Vulkan score of 33683 dwarfs the Pro 560’s Metal score by 61%, but that comparison crosses API boundaries. Within the shared benchmarks, the 780M wins 2–0, with the smallest margin being 20%.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon 780M averages 17588, while the AMD Radeon Pro 560 averages 17551. The 780M leads by 0.2%, a margin within statistical noise.

Q: Does the Radeon Pro 560 outperform the 780M in any benchmark?

A: Yes, in Geekbench Metal, the Pro 560 scores 20918. The 780M has no Metal benchmark listed, so no direct comparison exists, but the Pro 560’s Metal score is its highest among listed tests.

Q: How large is the Vulkan performance gap?

A: The 780M scores 33683 in Geekbench Vulkan versus the Pro 560’s 16232, a 107.5% advantage. This is the largest delta in any shared benchmark.

Q: What is the transistor count difference?

A: The 780M contains 25,390 million transistors on a 178 mm² die, while the Pro 560 contains 3,000 million on a 123 mm² die. The 780M has a 142.6M / mm² density versus 24.4M / mm².

Q: Which GPU supports ray tracing?

A: Only the AMD Radeon 780M has 12 dedicated ray tracing cores. The AMD Radeon Pro 560 has no ray tracing hardware listed.

Q: How does power consumption compare?

A: The 780M is rated at 15 W TDP, while the Pro 560 is rated at 75 W TDP. The 780M delivers higher compute performance at 20% of the power draw.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon 780M | AMD Radeon Pro 560 |

|---|---|---|

| Architecture | RDNA 3.0 | GCN 4.0 |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 14 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | GlobalFoundries |

| Transistors | 25,390 million | 3,000 million |

| Die Size | 178 mm² | 123 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 142.6M / mm² | 24.4M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 800 MHz | Not specified |

| Boost Clock | 2900 MHz | Not specified |

| Memory Size | System Shared | 4 GB |

| Memory Type | System Shared | GDDR5 |

| Memory Bus Width | System Shared | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | System Dependent | 81.28 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 768 | 1024 |

| TMUs | 48 | 64 |

| ROPs | 32 | 16 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | 12 | None |

| Pixel Rate | 92.80 GPixel/s | 14.51 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 139.2 GTexel/s | 58.05 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 8.909 TFLOPS | 1.858 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 8.909 TFLOPS (1:1) | 1.858 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 15 W | 75 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |

| DirectX Support | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12 (12_0) |

| Vulkan Support | 1.4 | 1.3 |

| Production Status | Active | End-of-life |

| Release Date | 2024-01-30 | 2017-04-17 |

The Verdict

The AMD Radeon 780M is the superior GPU for anyone running modern applications. Its 20% OpenCL lead and 107.5% Vulkan advantage over the Pro 560 are decisive, and its 12 ray tracing cores provide hardware features the Pro 560 cannot emulate. The 780M achieves higher scores with a 15 W TDP versus the Pro 560’s 75 W, making it dramatically more efficient. The 780M’s 8.909 TFLOPS FP32 performance versus 1.858 TFLOPS is a 4.8x compute gap that no memory advantage can bridge. Active production status and a 2024 release date also mean ongoing driver support.

The AMD Radeon Pro 560 remains relevant only for macOS-specific Metal workloads, where its 20918 Metal score is its strongest result. Its dedicated 4 GB GDDR5 memory with 81.28 GB/s bandwidth provides deterministic performance that the 780M’s system-shared memory cannot guarantee. At the 61st percentile for both GPUs, the Pro 560’s 17551 average score is nearly identical to the 780M’s 17588, but that parity vanishes in Vulkan. The Pro 560’s end-of-life status and lack of ray tracing make it a legacy part, best suited for fixed Mac hardware deployments that cannot migrate.

For new purchases, the 780M is the only rational choice, it wins every shared benchmark, uses 80% less power, and supports newer API versions. The Pro 560 should only be considered if the target system is locked to macOS and Metal, where its dedicated memory and mature driver stack offer stability. The data does not support choosing the Pro 560 for any OpenCL or Vulkan workload, as the 780M’s margins in those tests are too large to ignore. The verdict is clear: the 780M is the better GPU by every measurable metric except Metal-specific performance, which is unavailable on the 780M.