AMD Radeon HD 8950M vs AMD Radeon Pro 560X Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark split between the AMD Radeon Pro 560X and the AMD Radeon HD 8950M is a clean one, with each card claiming one decisive victory in the recorded head-to-head tests. The Pro 560X takes the Vulkan workload with a score of 16819 against 12979 for the HD 8950M, a margin of 29.6 percent. The HD 8950M answers back in OpenCL, posting 13772 against 9663 for the Pro 560X, a lead of 29.8 percent. These are not marginal differences; both cards win their preferred API by nearly a third, which points to fundamentally different design priorities rather than a simple generational step forward.

The Radeon Pro 560X is the modern choice for graphics workloads that use Vulkan, which has become a standard for current game engines and compute applications. Its Vulkan score of 16819 places it well above its own OpenCL result of 9663, and that gap suggests the architecture translates its resources into Vulkan performance much more efficiently. The HD 8950M, by contrast, is stronger in OpenCL, a compute API that was heavily used in professional and scientific applications during its active period. Its OpenCL score of 13772 exceeds its Vulkan score of 12979, showing that the older card remains competitive in compute tasks that rely on OpenCL.

Looking at overall averages, the Pro 560X holds a meaningful edge. Its average benchmark score is 15082, while the HD 8950M sits at 13376, a difference of roughly 12.8 percent. The percentile ranks reflect this: the Pro 560X sits at the 57th percentile of all GPUs in the database, while the HD 8950M is at the 54th. Neither card is a top-tier performer, but the Pro 560X is clearly the stronger of the two in aggregate. The nearest rival data reinforces this. The Pro 560X trades blows with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 Ti (0.1 percent ahead), the AMD Radeon RX 7600 (0.6 percent behind), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM (0.8 percent behind), and the AMD Radeon 680M (1.2 percent behind). The HD 8950M, meanwhile, sits in a slightly lower band, matching the AMD Radeon RX 5500M (0.2 percent ahead), the AMD FirePro M6100 (0.2 percent ahead), the AMD Radeon Pro 555 (0.2 percent behind), and the AMD Radeon Pro 555X (0.4 percent ahead).

For a buyer or system integrator choosing between these two, the use case matters more than the raw numbers. If the workload is Vulkan-based gaming or modern compute, the Pro 560X is the clear pick. If the workload is legacy OpenCL compute, the HD 8950M has a real argument, despite being older and less efficient.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different generations of AMD's Graphics Core Next design. The Radeon Pro 560X uses the Polaris 21 chip built on GCN 4.0, fabricated on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The Radeon HD 8950M uses the Saturn chip on GCN 2.0, built on a 28 nm process at TSMC. This is a two-node jump, and the results are visible in the transistor density. The Pro 560X packs 3,000 million transistors into a 123 mm² die, yielding 24.4 million transistors per square millimeter. The HD 8950M has 2,080 million transistors on a larger 160 mm² die, for just 13.0 million per square millimeter. The newer process allows the Pro 560X to fit nearly twice the transistor density on a smaller die.

The compute resources differ substantially. The Pro 560X has 1024 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 16 render output units. The HD 8950M has 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 16 render output units. The Pro 560X therefore has 33 percent more shading units and 33 percent more TMUs, while the ROP count is identical at 16. This explains the texture rate difference: the Pro 560X hits 64.26 GTexel/s, while the HD 8950M manages 51.60 GTexel/s. The pixel rates are closer: 16.06 GPixel/s for the Pro 560X versus 17.20 GPixel/s for the HD 8950M, a small win for the older card despite its lower shader count.

The memory configurations are similar in bus width but differ in capacity and speed. Both use GDDR5 on a 128 bit bus. The Pro 560X has 4 GB running at 5.9 Gbps effective, giving 94.08 GB/s of bandwidth. The HD 8950M has 2 GB at 5.5 Gbps effective, for 88.00 GB/s. The Pro 560X leads by about 6.9 percent in bandwidth and doubles the memory capacity, which matters for texture-heavy workloads and larger datasets.

The power profiles are very different. The Pro 560X is rated at 75 W with no power connectors, configured as an integrated graphics processor (IGP). The HD 8950M is rated at 100 W and comes as an MXM module. The bus interfaces also differ: the Pro 560X uses PCIe 3.0 x8, while the HD 8950M uses PCIe 3.0 x16. API support is a generational story as well. Both support DirectX 12 (12_0) and OpenGL 4.6. The Pro 560X supports Vulkan 1.3, while the HD 8950M is limited to Vulkan 1.2.170. The Pro 560X also lists FP16 at 2.056 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio to FP32, while the HD 8950M has no recorded FP16 capability.

FAQ

Q: Which card has more shading units?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 560X has 1024 shading units, while the AMD Radeon HD 8950M has 768, a 33 percent advantage for the Pro 560X.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference?

A: The Pro 560X has 4 GB of GDDR5, while the HD 8950M has 2 GB of GDDR5. Both use a 128 bit bus.

Q: Which card is faster in Vulkan?

A: The Pro 560X scores 16819 in Geekbench Vulkan, which is 29.6 percent ahead of the HD 8950M's 12979.

Q: Which card is faster in OpenCL?

A: The HD 8950M scores 13772 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 29.8 percent ahead of the Pro 560X's 9663.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The Pro 560X is rated at 75 W, while the HD 8950M is rated at 100 W.

Q: Which card has a higher transistor density?

A: The Pro 560X has 24.4 million transistors per square millimeter on a 14 nm process, while the HD 8950M has 13.0 million per square millimeter on a 28 nm process.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every major specification category. The process node is the most fundamental split: the Pro 560X uses 14 nm from GlobalFoundries, while the HD 8950M uses 28 nm from TSMC. The chip names also differ: Polaris 21 for the Pro 560X, Saturn for the HD 8950M. The architecture generation is GCN 4.0 for the Pro 560X and GCN 2.0 for the HD 8950M.

Transistor counts and die sizes move in opposite directions. The Pro 560X has 3,000 million transistors on a 123 mm² die. The HD 8950M has 2,080 million transistors on a 160 mm² die. This produces a transistor density of 24.4M per mm² for the Pro 560X versus 13.0M per mm² for the HD 8950M. The memory clock differs as well: the Pro 560X runs at 1470 MHz with 5.9 Gbps effective, while the HD 8950M runs at 1375 MHz with 5.5 Gbps effective. Memory size is 4 GB versus 2 GB, though both use GDDR5 on a 128 bit bus. Bandwidth is 94.08 GB/s for the Pro 560X and 88.00 GB/s for the HD 8950M.

The compute units scale with the architecture. The Pro 560X has 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The HD 8950M has 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. Pixel rate favors the HD 8950M at 17.20 GPixel/s versus 16.06 GPixel/s for the Pro 560X. Texture rate favors the Pro 560X at 64.26 GTexel/s versus 51.60 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 2.056 TFLOPS for the Pro 560X and 1.651 TFLOPS for the HD 8950M. The Pro 560X also lists FP16 at 2.056 TFLOPS, while the HD 8950M has no FP16 figure.

Power and form factor differ sharply. The Pro 560X is an IGP rated at 75 W with no power connectors. The HD 8950M is an MXM module rated at 100 W. The bus interface is PCIe 3.0 x8 for the Pro 560X and PCIe 3.0 x16 for the HD 8950M. Release dates are far apart: the Pro 560X launched in July 2018, while the HD 8950M launched in May 2013. Both are end-of-life products. The HD 8950M has a recorded predecessor, London, and successor, Gem System, while the Pro 560X has neither.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data contains only two tests, and each card wins one by a wide margin. The largest win for the Pro 560X comes in Geekbench Vulkan, where it scores 16819 against 12979 for the HD 8950M. That is a 29.6 percent advantage, and it is the single biggest differentiator between the two cards. The Vulkan result is also notable because the Pro 560X's nearest rivals in the database, such as the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM at 15199 and the AMD Radeon 680M at 15270, sit below its Vulkan score. The HD 8950M, by contrast, posts a Vulkan score that is below its own OpenCL result.

The largest win for the HD 8950M comes in Geekbench OpenCL, where it scores 13772 against 9663 for the Pro 560X. That is a 29.8 percent margin, essentially identical in magnitude to the Pro 560X's Vulkan win. The OpenCL result is striking because the Pro 560X's overall average benchmark score is 15082, far above its OpenCL score, while the HD 8950M's OpenCL score of 13772 is close to its average of 13376. This indicates that OpenCL is a relative weakness for the Pro 560X and a relative strength for the HD 8950M.

In the context of their nearest rivals, these scores place the cards in different competitive bands. The Pro 560X's average of 15082 puts it just ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 Ti (15063) and just behind the AMD Radeon RX 7600 (15171). The HD 8950M's average of 13376 puts it just ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 5500M (13356) and the AMD FirePro M6100 (13354), and just behind the AMD Radeon Pro 555 (13407). The delta percentages are all within 1.2 percent, meaning both cards are tightly grouped with their direct competitors. The Pro 560X sits in a higher overall tier, however, with an average score roughly 12.8 percent above the HD 8950M.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear split decision based on workload. For Vulkan-based applications, the AMD Radeon Pro 560X is the only sensible choice. Its score of 16819 is 29.6 percent higher than the HD 8950M's 12979, and its average benchmark score of 15082 places it in a higher performance tier overall. It also doubles the memory capacity to 4 GB, offers more bandwidth at 94.08 GB/s, and does so at a lower power draw of 75 W compared to 100 W. The newer 14 nm process and GCN 4.0 architecture deliver higher transistor density, more shading units, and better texture throughput.

For OpenCL compute workloads, the AMD Radeon HD 8950M has a genuine advantage. Its score of 13772 is 29.8 percent higher than the Pro 560X's 9663, and this is not a small margin. If the application relies on OpenCL, the HD 8950M will complete tasks faster, despite being older, using a larger 28 nm die, and consuming 25 W more power. Its pixel rate is also slightly higher at 17.20 GPixel/s versus 16.06 GPixel/s.

The percentile ranks tell the broader story. The Pro 560X sits at the 57th percentile of all GPUs, while the HD 8950M sits at the 54th. Both are mid-range parts, and neither is close to top-tier performance. The Pro 560X is the better all-round card, with a higher average score, more memory, better API support including Vulkan 1.3 versus 1.2.170, and a more modern feature set. The HD 8950M is a specialist that wins in OpenCL but loses everywhere else.

The choice comes down to the application. If the software uses Vulkan or needs more than 2 GB of memory, take the Pro 560X without hesitation. If the software is locked to OpenCL and memory capacity is not a constraint, the HD 8950M's 29.8 percent OpenCL lead makes it the faster option in that specific scenario. For a general-purpose mobile GPU, the Pro 560X is the safer pick: it wins the aggregate benchmark comparison, matches the HD 8950M in DirectX and OpenGL support, and does so with lower power consumption and a smaller die.