AMD Radeon Instinct MI60 vs AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 Comparison

The Verdict

The data positions these two AMD professional GPUs at very different performance tiers. The AMD Radeon Instinct MI60 is the clear performance leader, winning both recorded head-to-head benchmarks by wide margins. In Geekbench OpenCL, the MI60 scores 92,488 against the Pro Vega 56’s 61,930, a 49.3% advantage. In Geekbench Vulkan, the MI60 posts 92,444 versus 66,004, a 40.1% lead. The MI60 also holds a higher overall percentile ranking, sitting at the 93rd percentile among all GPUs, while the Pro Vega 56 sits at the 89th percentile.

The Pro Vega 56 is the appropriate choice for systems requiring an integrated form factor. Its slot width is listed as "IGP" and it has no power connectors, meaning it draws power directly from the motherboard slot. The MI60, by contrast, is a dual-slot card requiring both a 6-pin and an 8-pin power connector, with a suggested 700 W power supply. The Pro Vega 56 also offers a broader set of display outputs, including one HDMI 2.0b and three DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, whereas the MI60 provides only a single mini-DisplayPort 1.4a. This makes the Pro Vega 56 the practical option for workstation setups that need multi-monitor output with minimal internal space.

For compute-focused workloads, the MI60 is the decisive pick. Its 32 GB of HBM2 memory, 4096-bit bus, and 1.02 TB/s bandwidth dwarf the Pro Vega 56’s 8 GB, 2048-bit bus, and 402.4 GB/s. The MI60 also operates on the newer 7 nm process with a 1200 MHz base and 1800 MHz boost clock, compared to the Pro Vega 56’s 14 nm process with a 1138 MHz base and 1250 MHz boost. The MI60’s FP32 throughput of 14.75 TFLOPS is 64.6% higher than the Pro Vega 56’s 8.960 TFLOPS. Any workload that scales with memory capacity or raw floating-point throughput should favor the MI60.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different generations of AMD’s Graphics Core Next architecture. The MI60 uses GCN 5.1 on the Vega 20 chip, manufactured on a 7 nm process at TSMC. The Pro Vega 56 uses GCN 5.0 on the Vega 10 chip, manufactured on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. This process shrink gives the MI60 a significantly higher transistor density: 40.0 million transistors per square millimeter versus 25.3 million on the Pro Vega 56. Interestingly, the MI60 packs more transistors overall (13,230 million) into a smaller die (331 mm²) compared to the Pro Vega 56 (12,500 million transistors on a 495 mm² die). This is a direct consequence of the 7 nm node.

The MI60 has a larger compute configuration across every relevant unit count. It features 4096 shading units, 256 texture mapping units, and 64 ROPs. The Pro Vega 56 has 3584 shading units, 224 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The ROP count is identical, which means the pixel throughput difference is driven entirely by clock speeds. The MI60’s pixel rate is 115.2 GPixel/s versus the Pro Vega 56’s 80.00 GPixel/s. The texture rate gap is even larger: 460.8 GTexel/s for the MI60 versus 280.0 GTexel/s for the Pro Vega 56, reflecting both the extra TMUs and the higher clocks.

Memory architecture differs substantially. The MI60 uses 32 GB of HBM2 on a 4096-bit bus, achieving 1.02 TB/s of bandwidth. The Pro Vega 56 uses 8 GB of HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus, achieving 402.4 GB/s. The MI60’s memory clock is rated at 1000 MHz with 2 Gbps effective, while the Pro Vega 56’s memory runs at 786 MHz with 1572 Mbps effective. The MI60 also supports PCIe 4.0 x16, double the bandwidth of the Pro Vega 56’s PCIe 3.0 x16 interface. Both support DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3, so API feature levels are identical.

The power profiles diverge sharply. The MI60 has a 300 W TDP and requires dual-slot cooling with external power connectors. The Pro Vega 56 has a 210 W TDP and is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with no power connectors and no listed power supply requirement. The MI60 is also physically longer at 267 mm (10.5 inches) and taller at 111 mm (4.4 inches), whereas the Pro Vega 56 has no published dimensions, consistent with its integrated nature. Both are marked as end-of-life products. The MI60 was released later, in November 2018, while the Pro Vega 56 arrived in August 2017.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon Instinct MI60 has an average benchmark score of 92,466 across its recorded tests. The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 has an average score of 63,693. This represents a 45.2% advantage for the MI60.

Q: How does the MI60 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The MI60 is 0.9% ahead of the NVIDIA RTX A4500 (which scores 91,671) and 1.5% ahead of the NVIDIA RTX A4500 Mobile (91,134). It trails the AMD Radeon Pro VII (97,131) by 4.8% and the AMD Radeon RX 7900M (97,487) by 5.2%.

Q: How does the Pro Vega 56 stack up against its nearest rivals?

A: The Pro Vega 56 is essentially even with the AMD Radeon RX 7600M, which scores 63,775, a 0.1% difference. It is 0.2% behind the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT LP (63,830) and the NVIDIA CMP 30HX (63,842), and 0.8% behind the AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 (64,212).

Q: Which GPU has more memory bandwidth?

A: The MI60 has 1.02 TB/s of bandwidth from its 32 GB HBM2 memory on a 4096-bit bus. The Pro Vega 56 has 402.4 GB/s from its 8 GB HBM2 memory on a 2048-bit bus. The MI60’s bandwidth is more than double.

Q: Can the Pro Vega 56 be used in a standard desktop expansion slot?

A: The Pro Vega 56 is listed as an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with no power connectors and no slot width beyond "IGP". It is not a standard add-in card. The MI60, by contrast, is a dual-slot card with a 6-pin and 8-pin power connector.

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute throughput?

A: The MI60 delivers 14.75 TFLOPS of FP32 performance. The Pro Vega 56 delivers 8.960 TFLOPS. The MI60 is approximately 64.6% faster in single-precision compute.

Specification Differences

The table below highlights only the fields where the two GPUs differ according to the database.

| Specification | AMD Radeon Instinct MI60 | AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 |

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

| Chip | Vega 20 | Vega 10 |

| Architecture | GCN 5.1 | GCN 5.0 |

| Generation | Radeon Instinct (MIx) | Radeon Pro Mac (Vega Series) |

| Process Node | 7 nm | 14 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | GlobalFoundries |

| Transistors | 13,230 million | 12,500 million |

| Die Size | 331 mm² | 495 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 40.0M / mm² | 25.3M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1200 MHz | 1138 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1800 MHz | 1250 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1000 MHz, 2 Gbps effective | 786 MHz, 1572 Mbps effective |

| Memory Size | 32 GB | 8 GB |

| Memory Bus Width | 4096 bit | 2048 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 1.02 TB/s | 402.4 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 4096 | 3584 |

| TMUs | 256 | 224 |

| Pixel Rate | 115.2 GPixel/s | 80.00 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 460.8 GTexel/s | 280.0 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 14.75 TFLOPS | 8.960 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 29.49 TFLOPS (2:1) | 17.92 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 300 W | 210 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | IGP |

| Power Connectors | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin | None |

| Suggested PSU | 700 W | None listed |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | 1x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a | 1x HDMI 2.0b, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a |

| Dimensions | 267 mm x 111 mm | Not listed |

| Release Date | 2018-11-17 | 2017-08-13 |

| Predecessor | FirePro Data Center | None listed |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records two direct benchmark comparisons between these GPUs, both in Geekbench tests. The MI60 wins both, giving it a 2-0 record in head-to-head contests.

The first test is Geekbench OpenCL. The MI60 scores 92,488, while the Pro Vega 56 scores 61,930. The delta is 49.3% in favor of the MI60. This is the larger margin of the two tests. The OpenCL workload appears to be sensitive to the combination of compute unit count, clock speed, and memory bandwidth, all of which favor the MI60. The MI60’s 4096 shading units at an 1800 MHz boost clock, paired with 1.02 TB/s of bandwidth, provide a substantial throughput advantage over the Pro Vega 56’s 3584 shading units at 1250 MHz with 402.4 GB/s.

The second test is Geekbench Vulkan. The MI60 scores 92,444, and the Pro Vega 56 scores 66,004. The delta is 40.1% in favor of the MI60. Interestingly, the Pro Vega 56 performs relatively better in Vulkan than in OpenCL relative to the MI60. Its Vulkan score of 66,004 is higher than its OpenCL score of 61,930, while the MI60’s scores are nearly identical across the two APIs (92,488 vs 92,444). This suggests the Pro Vega 56’s Vulkan driver path extracts more of its theoretical capability, but the absolute gap remains very large.

The MI60’s nearest rivals provide context for its raw performance. It edges out the NVIDIA RTX A4500 by 0.9% and the RTX A4500 Mobile by 1.5%. It sits below the AMD Radeon Pro VII by 4.8% and the AMD Radeon RX 7900M by 5.2%. These are relatively small margins, indicating that the MI60 is competitive with a wide range of high-end workstation and mobile GPUs, landing near the top of the 93rd percentile.

The Pro Vega 56’s nearest rivals cluster much closer to its own score. The AMD Radeon RX 7600M is 0.1% behind, the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT LP and NVIDIA CMP 30HX are each 0.2% behind, and the AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 is 0.8% ahead. This tight grouping around the 89th percentile shows that the Pro Vega 56’s performance level is a common target for mid-range GPUs, but it is far below the MI60’s tier.

The wins for the MI60 are not marginal. A 49.3% lead in OpenCL and a 40.1% lead in Vulkan are decisive gaps. These are not the kind of differences that driver updates or workload tuning can bridge. The MI60 is in a fundamentally higher performance class, driven by its 7 nm process, higher clocks, more compute units, and four times the memory capacity with more than double the bandwidth. The Pro Vega 56, while competent for its generation, cannot match the MI60’s throughput in compute-oriented benchmarks.