AMD Radeon Pro 460 vs AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT Comparison

The AMD Radeon Pro 460 and AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT represent two entirely different eras of graphics hardware, separated by a generational leap in architecture, process technology, and performance. The data shows a decisive victory for the RX 7600 XT in every shared benchmark, with the older Pro 460 trailing by margins exceeding 65%. However, the Pro 460 occupies a unique niche as a low-power, integrated-class solution for specific portable devices, making the choice between them less about raw speed and more about the intended platform and workload.

The Verdict

The benchmark results are unambiguous: the AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT is the overwhelmingly superior performer for any task that leverages its compute or rendering capabilities. In Geekbench OpenCL, it scores 92,426, which is roughly 505% higher than the Pro 460's 15,284. In Geekbench Vulkan, the RX 7600 XT's 48,366 score dwarfs the Pro 460's 16,816, a 187% advantage. For gamers, content creators, or professionals running modern, demanding applications, the RX 7600 XT is the only viable choice from this pairing.

The AMD Radeon Pro 460 is not a competitive product against the RX 7600 XT; it is a product for a specific, legacy purpose. Its 35 W TDP and IGP slot width indicate it was designed for thin-and-light Apple Mac systems from the 2016 era. If a user is maintaining or repairing such a system, the Pro 460 is the appropriate, drop-in component. For any new build or upgrade path, the RX 7600 XT, with its active production status and modern feature set, is the clear selection, provided the user's platform can accommodate its 190 W TDP and dual-slot cooler.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are built on fundamentally different architectures, nodes, and design philosophies. The Radeon Pro 460 uses the Baffin chip based on the GCN 4.0 architecture, manufactured on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It packs 3,000 million transistors into a 123 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 24.4 million transistors per square millimeter. Its memory subsystem consists of 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, yielding 81.28 GB/s of bandwidth. The chip contains 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. Its compute capabilities are rated at 1.858 TFLOPS for both FP32 and FP16, reflecting a 1:1 ratio. The Pro 460 runs at a base clock of 850 MHz with a boost clock of 907 MHz.

In contrast, the Radeon RX 7600 XT is built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture using the Navi 33 chip, fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC. This newer node allows for 13,300 million transistors in a 204 mm² die, a density of 65.2 million transistors per square millimeter. The memory configuration is significantly more robust: 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The RX 7600 XT features 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 32 dedicated ray tracing cores. Its FP32 and FP16 performance is rated at 22.57 TFLOPS, again at a 1:1 ratio. The clock speeds are dramatically higher, with a base of 1980 MHz, a game clock of 2470 MHz, and a boost clock of 2755 MHz.

Feature support also diverges sharply. The Pro 460 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The RX 7600 XT supports the newer DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The RX 7600 XT also boasts modern display outputs with 1x HDMI 2.1a and 3x DisplayPort 2.1, while the Pro 460 has "Portable Device Dependent" outputs, highlighting its fixed-function integration into laptops. The RX 7600 XT also uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface, doubling the bandwidth of the Pro 460's PCIe 3.0 x8 link.

Where Each One Wins

The Radeon RX 7600 XT wins in nearly every conceivable category that can be measured. Its architectural advantages translate into massive performance gains in compute-heavy tasks like OpenCL and Vulkan workloads. The 16 GB VRAM capacity and higher bandwidth (288.0 GB/s vs 81.28 GB/s) make it suitable for modern games with high-resolution textures and for compute tasks that require large memory footprints. The inclusion of 32 ray tracing cores enables hardware-accelerated ray tracing, a feature entirely absent from the older Pro 460. Its 22.57 TFLOPS of FP32 performance provides the headroom needed for complex shaders and simulation workloads.

The Radeon Pro 460's only domain of "victory" is in power efficiency and physical footprint. With a TDP of 35 W, it consumes a fraction of the 190 W required by the RX 7600 XT. It requires no power connectors, whereas the RX 7600 XT needs a single 8-pin connector, and the Pro 460's IGP slot design allows it to be soldered directly onto a motherboard, making it suitable for ultra-thin designs. It is not a performance win, but a design win for a specific, legacy form factor. The Pro 460's nearest rivals, such as the AMD Radeon Pro 560 and the AMD Radeon 780M, have average scores within 0.5% of it, indicating it sits in a performance tier that is now dominated by integrated graphics.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT is dramatically faster, scoring 92,426 compared to the Radeon Pro 460's 15,284, a delta of -83.5% from the perspective of the Pro 460.

Q: Does the Radeon Pro 460 support ray tracing?

A: No. The Radeon Pro 460 has no ray tracing cores, while the Radeon RX 7600 XT includes 32 dedicated RT cores.

Q: What is the difference in memory capacity?

A: The Radeon RX 7600 XT offers 16 GB of GDDR6 memory, which is four times the 4 GB of GDDR5 found on the Radeon Pro 460.

Q: Which card has a higher transistor density?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT has a transistor density of 65.2M / mm², significantly higher than the Radeon Pro 460's 24.4M / mm², due to its more advanced 6 nm process node.

Q: Is the Radeon RX 7600 XT still in production?

A: Yes, the RX 7600 XT has an "Active" production status. The Radeon Pro 460 is listed as "End-of-life".

Q: What is the delta between the two GPUs in Geekbench Vulkan?

A: The RX 7600 XT outperforms the Pro 460 by 65.2%, with scores of 48,366 and 16,816, respectively.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data provides a stark illustration of the generational gulf between these two products. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the Radeon RX 7600 XT delivers a score of 92,426. The Radeon Pro 460 manages only 15,284. This represents a delta of -83.5% for the Pro 460, meaning the RX 7600 XT is more than six times faster in this compute-heavy benchmark. This massive gap is attributable to the RX 7600 XT's 12.15x higher FP32 throughput (22.57 TFLOPS vs 1.858 TFLOPS), its 3.5x higher memory bandwidth, and its significantly higher clock speeds.

The Geekbench Vulkan benchmark shows a similar, albeit less extreme, pattern. The RX 7600 XT scores 48,366, while the Pro 460 scores 16,816. The delta is -65.2% for the older card. This test reflects both compute and graphics rendering workloads through the Vulkan API. The RX 7600 XT's advantage here is partly due to its support for the newer Vulkan 1.4 specification, compared to the Pro 460's Vulkan 1.3 support, along with its superior raw hardware resources.

The RX 7600 XT wins 2 out of 2 head-to-head benchmarks, with zero wins for the Pro 460. While the Pro 460's average benchmark score of 17,509 places it in the 61st percentile of all GPUs, the RX 7600 XT's average score of 17,083 sits in the 60th percentile. This apparent contradiction is resolved by examining the benchmark suites: the Pro 460's scores are derived from older, less demanding tests (Geekbench Metal, OpenCL, Vulkan), while the RX 7600 XT's average includes newer, more punishing workloads like 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 and Passmark tests, where it scores 17,132 in G3D. The RX 7600 XT's nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070, scores 17,208, a delta of -0.7%, placing the RX 7600 XT in the same performance class as a previous-generation high-end card. The Pro 460, in contrast, trades blows with the integrated AMD Radeon 780M, which is within 0.5% of its average score, showing it is firmly in the integrated-graphics performance tier.