AMD Radeon HD 7970M vs AMD Radeon Pro 5600M Comparison

# AMD Radeon HD 7970M vs AMD Radeon Pro 5600M

The AMD Radeon Pro 5600M is the clear performance winner in this comparison, delivering a 2.8x higher Geekbench OpenCL score (47,783 vs 17,019) while consuming half the power (50 W vs 100 W). The HD 7970M, despite its age, remains competitive in its percentile ranking (60th vs 59th), but the Pro 5600M’s architectural advantages and modern feature set make it the superior choice for any workload that leverages current APIs or high-bandwidth memory. The HD 7970M is only relevant for legacy systems where its MXM form factor and older driver support are required.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the AMD Radeon Pro 5600M wins the only direct head-to-head benchmark available, the Geekbench OpenCL test, by a massive 64.4% margin (47,783 vs 17,019). This is not a marginal victory — it is a generational leap. The Pro 5600M’s average benchmark score of 16,351 places it within 0.1% of the AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT (16,361), a desktop-class GPU, while the HD 7970M’s 17,019 OpenCL score sits just 0.1% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 690 (17,037). However, the HD 7970M’s single benchmark does not reflect its overall standing: its 60th percentile versus the Pro 5600M’s 59th percentile suggests the older card is not categorically obsolete in synthetic rankings.

For professionals using Metal or Vulkan APIs, the Pro 5600M is the only choice — it scores 55,030 in Geekbench Metal and 46,425 in Vulkan, tests the HD 7970M does not even have data for. For users constrained to 100 W power budgets in older MXM laptops, the HD 7970M remains functional but is outclassed by every metric that matters. The verdict is simple: choose the Pro 5600M for any modern workload, and reserve the HD 7970M for legacy hardware compatibility where its 28 nm GCN 1.0 architecture and 2 GB GDDR5 memory are sufficient.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs represent entirely different eras of AMD design. The HD 7970M uses the Wimbledon chip built on GCN 1.0 architecture, fabricated on TSMC’s 28 nm process, while the Pro 5600M uses the Navi 12 chip on RDNA 1.0 architecture, fabricated on TSMC’s 7 nm process. This process shrink is dramatic: the HD 7970M packs 2,800 million transistors on a 212 mm² die (13.2 million transistors per mm²), whereas the Pro 5600M’s transistor count and die size are not listed in the data, but its 7 nm node inherently allows for higher density and efficiency.

The shader configurations differ fundamentally. The HD 7970M has 1,280 shading units, 80 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 32 render output units (ROPs). The Pro 5600M doubles these counts: 2,560 shading units, 160 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. This doubling explains the Pro 5600M’s higher theoretical throughput — 5.857 TFLOPS FP32 versus 2.176 TFLOPS for the HD 7970M — and its 73.22 GPixel/s pixel rate versus 27.20 GPixel/s.

Memory architecture is where the gap becomes even more pronounced. The HD 7970M uses 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 153.6 GB/s bandwidth, while the Pro 5600M uses 8 GB of HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus with 394.2 GB/s bandwidth — a 2.57x bandwidth advantage. The Pro 5600M also supports FP16 at 11.71 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio), which the HD 7970M lacks entirely. API support differs as well: the Pro 5600M supports DirectX 12 (12_1) versus the HD 7970M’s DirectX 12 (11_1), and Vulkan 1.3 versus 1.2.170.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The single direct comparison in the data is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and the Pro 5600M dominates. Its score of 47,783 is 64.4% higher than the HD 7970M’s 17,019 — meaning the HD 7970M achieves only 35.6% of the Pro 5600M’s performance. To put this in context, the Pro 5600M’s OpenCL result is 2.8x higher, a margin that would be considered decisive in any generation-on-generation comparison.

The HD 7970M’s 17,019 OpenCL score places it within 0.1% of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 690 (17,037) and 0.4% of the AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT (17,083), while trailing the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 (17,208) by 1.1%. This indicates that, in raw OpenCL compute, the HD 7970M is still competitive with much newer mid-range cards — but that reflects its original high-end positioning, not a sign of modern relevance.

The Pro 5600M’s broader benchmark suite reveals its strengths. In Geekbench Metal, it scores 55,030, and in Vulkan, 46,425 — both far above its OpenCL result. Its PassMark scores show a mixed profile: 9,279 in G3D, 4,031 in GPU Compute, but notably weak legacy DirectX results (62 in DirectX 10, 59 in DirectX 11, 39 in DirectX 12, and 118 in DirectX 9). The high G3D score (9,279) and GPU Compute score (4,031) suggest strong general-purpose compute, while the low DirectX 12 score (39) indicates these older APIs are not optimized for this architecture.

Specification Differences

The key specification differences between the two GPUs are stark:

| Specification | HD 7970M | Pro 5600M |

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

| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | RDNA 1.0 |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 7 nm |

| Shading Units | 1,280 | 2,560 |

| TMUs | 80 | 160 |

| ROPs | 32 | 64 |

| FP32 | 2.176 TFLOPS | 5.857 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | None | 11.71 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| Memory Size | 2 GB | 8 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | HBM2 |

| Memory Bus | 256 bit | 2048 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 153.6 GB/s | 394.2 GB/s |

| Base Clock | Not listed | 822 MHz |

| Boost Clock | Not listed | 1144 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1200 MHz (4.8 Gbps) | 770 MHz (1540 Mbps) |

| TDP | 100 W | 50 W |

| Slot Width | MXM Module | IGP |

| Bus Interface | MXM-B (3.0) | PCIe 4.0 x16 |

| DirectX | 12 (11_1) | 12 (12_1) |

| Vulkan | 1.2.170 | 1.3 |

| Transistors | 2,800 million | Not listed |

| Die Size | 212 mm² | Not listed |

| Release Date | 2012-04-23 | 2020-06-14 |

The Pro 5600M has double the shading units, TMUs, and ROPs, 4x the memory capacity, 2.57x the bandwidth, and 2.69x the FP32 throughput — all while drawing half the power. The HD 7970M’s only advantages are its 2,800 million transistor count (which is an architectural necessity, not a benefit) and its MXM form factor for specific laptop upgrades.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute performance?

A: The Pro 5600M delivers 5.857 TFLOPS FP32 versus the HD 7970M’s 2.176 TFLOPS, a 2.69x advantage. It also supports FP16 at 11.71 TFLOPS, which the HD 7970M cannot do.

Q: How do their memory subsystems compare?

A: The Pro 5600M uses 8 GB of HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus with 394.2 GB/s bandwidth, while the HD 7970M uses 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 153.6 GB/s. The Pro 5600M has 4x the capacity and 2.57x the bandwidth.

Q: Is the HD 7970M competitive with modern GPUs?

A: In OpenCL compute, the HD 7970M scores 17,019, which is within 0.1% of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 690 (17,037) and 0.4% of the AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT (17,083). However, it lacks modern API support and has only 2 GB of memory.

Q: What are the power consumption differences?

A: The Pro 5600M has a TDP of 50 W, exactly half the HD 7970M’s 100 W, while delivering significantly higher performance.

Q: Which GPU supports more modern APIs?

A: The Pro 5600M supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.3, while the HD 7970M supports DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170. Both support OpenGL 4.6.

Q: How do their benchmark percentiles compare?

A: The HD 7970M ranks in the 60th percentile of all GPUs, while the Pro 5600M ranks in the 59th percentile. Despite the Pro 5600M’s higher raw scores, its average benchmark score (16,351) is slightly lower than the HD 7970M’s single OpenCL score (17,019), though the Pro 5600M’s 10 benchmark results paint a fuller picture.

Where Each One Wins

The Pro 5600M wins in virtually every performance category. Its 2,560 shading units and 160 TMUs provide double the texture throughput (183.0 GTexel/s versus 68.00 GTexel/s) and double the pixel fill rate (73.22 GPixel/s versus 27.20 GPixel/s). For compute-heavy workloads like OpenCL, the Pro 5600M’s 47,783 score crushes the HD 7970M’s 17,019. For Metal-based applications (macOS ecosystems), the Pro 5600M’s 55,030 score is its strongest result. Its 8 GB HBM2 memory with 394.2 GB/s bandwidth makes it suitable for large datasets and high-resolution textures, while the HD 7970M’s 2 GB GDDR5 will bottleneck on modern workloads.

The HD 7970M’s wins are limited to specific legacy scenarios. Its 28 nm GCN 1.0 architecture and 2,800 million transistors (on a 212 mm² die) represent a design that was high-end in 2012, and its 60th percentile ranking shows it still holds some relevance. Its MXM-B (3.0) interface and 100 W TDP mean it can slot into older gaming laptops that require that form factor, where the Pro 5600M’s IGP (integrated graphics processor) design would not fit. For users running DirectX 9 or DirectX 10 applications, the HD 7970M’s PassMark scores (118 and 62, respectively) are its only comparative strength — though these are not directly compared to the Pro 5600M in the data.

The Pro 5600M is the definitive winner for any modern use case: professional rendering, compute offload, or high-bandwidth memory workloads. The HD 7970M remains a historical artifact that, while still ranking near mid-pack in percentile terms, cannot match the Pro 5600M’s architectural efficiency, memory bandwidth, or API support. Choose the Pro 5600M unless your hardware physically requires an MXM module.