AMD Radeon Pro 460 vs AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data is unambiguous: the AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT wins every direct comparison in the database, with margins that are not incremental but generational. Across the three shared benchmark tests, the RX 5600 XT dominates the Radeon Pro 460 by margins ranging from 234.3% to 348.4%. The largest gap appears in Geekbench OpenCL, where the RX 5600 XT scores 68,537 against the Pro 460's 15,284, a 348.4% advantage. That is not a close contest; that is a different performance class entirely.

In Geekbench Metal, the RX 5600 XT posts 80,376 points, while the Pro 460 manages 20,426. The delta of 293.5% means the RX 5600 XT delivers nearly four times the Metal compute throughput. The smallest relative gap is in Geekbench Vulkan, yet even there the RX 5600 XT's 56,218 score dwarfs the Pro 460's 16,816, a 234.3% lead. For context, the Pro 460's own nearest rivals in the database include the AMD Radeon Pro 560, which scores 17,551 on average, just 0.2% higher. The RX 5600 XT's nearest rivals include the Intel Arc A750 at 20,582 and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile at 20,534, both of which are within 0.9% of its aggregate average score of 20,713. This positioning shows that the RX 5600 XT competes in a completely different tier than the Pro 460.

The aggregate average benchmark score reinforces the split. The RX 5600 XT averages 20,713 across all recorded tests, placing it in the 66th percentile of all GPUs in the database. The Pro 460 averages 17,509, at the 61st percentile. While the percentile difference appears modest, the raw score gap of 3,204 points is substantial. The RX 5600 XT also has a much broader benchmark footprint: it has recorded scores in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 (1,669), Passmark DirectX 9 (202), DirectX 10 (73), DirectX 11 (96), DirectX 12 (52), G2D (870), G3D (13,457), and GPU Compute (6,296). The Pro 460 has only three recorded tests, all Geekbench variants. This breadth of data confirms the RX 5600 XT is a fully featured desktop part, while the Pro 460 is a limited mobile or integrated solution.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap explains the benchmark chasm. The RX 5600 XT uses the Navi 10 chip built on RDNA 1.0 architecture, fabricated on a 7 nm process at TSMC. The Pro 460 uses the Baffin chip on GCN 4.0 architecture, fabricated on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The node difference alone is significant: 7 nm versus 14 nm means the RX 5600 XT packs 10,300 million transistors into a 251 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 41.0 million per mm². The Pro 460 has 3,000 million transistors on a 123 mm² die, with a density of 24.4 million per mm². The RX 5600 XT has more than three times the transistor count on a die that is roughly twice the size.

Shading resources follow the same pattern. The RX 5600 XT has 2,304 shading units, 144 texture mapping units, and 64 render output units. The Pro 460 has 1,024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and only 16 ROPs. That 4x difference in ROPs directly explains why the RX 5600 XT's pixel rate is 99.84 GPixel/s versus the Pro 460's 14.51 GPixel/s. Texture rate tells a similar story: 224.6 GTexel/s versus 58.05 GTexel/s. The FP32 compute rating is 7.188 TFLOPS for the RX 5600 XT versus 1.858 TFLOPS for the Pro 460. Notably, the Pro 460 has a 1:1 FP16 to FP32 ratio (1.858 TFLOPS each), while the RX 5600 XT has a 2:1 ratio, delivering 14.38 TFLOPS FP16 versus 7.188 TFLOPS FP32.

Memory architecture is equally divergent. The RX 5600 XT uses 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, with memory clocked at 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective) and bandwidth of 288.0 GB/s. The Pro 460 uses 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, at 1270 MHz (5.1 Gbps effective), yielding 81.28 GB/s. That is a 3.5x bandwidth advantage for the RX 5600 XT. The bus interface also differs: PCIe 4.0 x16 for the RX 5600 XT, versus PCIe 3.0 x8 for the Pro 460. The Pro 460 is listed as an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with no power connectors and a 35 W TDP, while the RX 5600 XT is a dual-slot card with a 150 W TDP and a single 8-pin connector, requiring a 450 W suggested PSU.

The Verdict

The data supports only one conclusion for raw performance: the AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT is categorically superior to the AMD Radeon Pro 460 in every measured benchmark. The smallest margin is 234.3% in Vulkan, and the largest is 348.4% in OpenCL. There is no workload in the recorded data where the Pro 460 wins, and the architecture comparison explains why: the RX 5600 XT has more shading units, more TMUs, more ROPs, more memory bandwidth, a newer process node, and a newer architecture generation.

However, the Pro 460 is not without a role. Its 35 W TDP, IGP form factor, and lack of power connectors make it suitable for systems where physical space and power draw are constrained. The RX 5600 XT, by contrast, is a full-size, dual-slot card requiring external power and a substantial PSU. Users with a desktop build that can accommodate a 150 W card and a 450 W PSU should choose the RX 5600 XT without hesitation. Users constrained to an integrated or low-profile solution, or those using a portable device where the Pro 460's "Portable Device Dependent" display outputs are relevant, may have no other option. The Pro 460 also supports OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.3, while the RX 5600 XT supports Vulkan 1.4 and DirectX 12 (12_1) versus the Pro 460's DirectX 12 (12_0). For modern gaming or compute workloads, the RX 5600 XT is the clear pick.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT | AMD Radeon Pro 460 |

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

| Architecture | RDNA 1.0 | GCN 4.0 |

| Process Node | 7 nm (TSMC) | 14 nm (GlobalFoundries) |

| Transistors | 10,300 million | 3,000 million |

| Die Size | 251 mm² | 123 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 41.0M / mm² | 24.4M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1130 MHz | 850 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1560 MHz | 907 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective) | 1270 MHz (5.1 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 6 GB | 4 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |

| Memory Bus Width | 192 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 288.0 GB/s | 81.28 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 2304 | 1024 |

| TMUs | 144 | 64 |

| ROPs | 64 | 16 |

| Pixel Rate | 99.84 GPixel/s | 14.51 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 224.6 GTexel/s | 58.05 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 7.188 TFLOPS | 1.858 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 14.38 TFLOPS (2:1) | 1.858 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 150 W | 35 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | IGP |

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

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |

| Display Outputs | 1x HDMI 2.0b, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a | Portable Device Dependent |

| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 (12_0) |

| Vulkan | 1.4 | 1.3 |

| Release Date | 2020-01-20 | 2016-10-29 |

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT has 288.0 GB/s, which is 3.5 times the Pro 460's 81.28 GB/s.

Q: What is the transistor density difference?

A: The RX 5600 XT has a transistor density of 41.0M / mm², while the Pro 460 has 24.4M / mm².

Q: How much faster is the RX 5600 XT in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The RX 5600 XT scores 68,537 versus the Pro 460's 15,284, a 348.4% advantage.

Q: Does the Pro 460 require external power?

A: No, the Pro 460 has no power connectors and a 35 W TDP, while the RX 5600 XT requires a single 8-pin connector and 150 W.

Q: Which GPU supports DirectX 12_1?

A: Only the RX 5600 XT supports DirectX 12 (12_1). The Pro 460 is limited to DirectX 12 (12_0).

Q: What is the memory type and bus width for each?

A: The RX 5600 XT uses 6 GB GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus; the Pro 460 uses 4 GB GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 5600 XT wins in every performance category recorded in the database. It is the choice for any application that depends on raw compute, high frame rates, or large memory bandwidth. Its 7.188 TFLOPS FP32 and 14.38 TFLOPS FP16 make it suitable for GPU compute tasks, while its 99.84 GPixel/s pixel rate and 224.6 GTexel/s texture rate support demanding rasterization workloads. The 288.0 GB/s bandwidth and 6 GB frame buffer accommodate higher resolution textures and larger datasets. Its PCIe 4.0 x16 interface also provides twice the bus bandwidth of the Pro 460's PCIe 3.0 x8.

The Pro 460 wins in power efficiency and physical footprint. At 35 W TDP with no external power connectors, it can operate in systems where the RX 5600 XT's 150 W TDP and 8-pin connector are not feasible. Its IGP slot width means it does not occupy a standard expansion slot in the same way, and its "Portable Device Dependent" display outputs indicate it is designed for embedded or mobile configurations. The Pro 460's 1.858 TFLOPS FP32 and FP16 performance, while far below the RX 5600 XT, may still satisfy basic display output and light compute needs.

In terms of software API support, the RX 5600 XT has the edge with Vulkan 1.4 versus the Pro 460's Vulkan 1.3, and DirectX 12_1 versus 12_0. The Pro 460 matches OpenGL 4.6, so legacy OpenGL workloads are equally supported. For any user who can accommodate the RX 5600 XT's size and power requirements, the data shows no reason to choose the Pro 460. For users strictly limited to an integrated or portable solution, the Pro 460 remains a functional, low-power option, but it does not compete on measured performance.