AMD Radeon Pro 460 vs AMD Radeon RX 7600S Comparison

The AMD Radeon RX 7600S decisively outperforms the AMD Radeon Pro 460 in every shared benchmark, with the data showing a generational leap rather than a close contest. The RX 7600S delivers roughly 4.4x the OpenCL score and 4.4x the Vulkan score of the Pro 460, reflecting a complete architectural overhaul. While the Pro 460 holds a marginal edge in overall percentile ranking (61st vs 60th), this is a statistical artifact of different benchmark suites; in direct head-to-head comparisons, the RX 7600S is the clear victor.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data contains two direct comparisons, and the AMD Radeon RX 7600S wins both by overwhelming margins. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 7600S scores 68,012 against the Pro 460’s 15,284, a delta of -77.5% from the Pro 460’s perspective—meaning the RX 7600S is approximately 345% faster. The Vulkan test tells a similar story: RX 7600S scores 73,868 versus 16,816, with a delta of -77.2%, again representing roughly a 4.4x advantage. These are not incremental improvements; they represent a fundamental performance tier separation.

The Pro 460’s standalone benchmarks—Geekbench Metal at 20,426 and Vulkan at 16,816—show it performing near its average score of 17,509. Its nearest rivals in the database include the NVIDIA Tesla K40c (avg 17,468, delta 0.2%), AMD Radeon Pro 560 (avg 17,551, delta -0.2%), and AMD Radeon 780M (avg 17,588, delta -0.5%). This places the Pro 460 in a tight cluster where a 1% swing separates competitors, indicating it is a mid-tier mobile part from its era.

The RX 7600S, by contrast, posts an average benchmark score of 16,696 across its wider test suite, which includes PassMark DirectX 9/10/11/12 tests, G2D, G3D, and GPU compute. Its nearest rivals—NVIDIA T400 4 GB (avg 16,792, delta -0.6%), NVIDIA T400 (avg 16,508, delta 1.1%), and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D V2 (avg 16,504, delta 1.2%)—show it competing with professional workstation cards. The RX 7600S’s PassMark G3D score of 15,408 and GPU compute score of 6,520 further confirm its capability in both rasterization and compute workloads.

When interpreting these numbers, the key takeaway is that the RX 7600S’s OpenCL and Vulkan scores are not just higher—they are in a different performance class. The Pro 460’s 1.858 TFLOPS FP32 throughput is dwarfed by the RX 7600S’s 15.77 TFLOPS, an 8.5x raw computational advantage. This explains why the head-to-head deltas are so lopsided; the RX 7600S is not merely a newer version of the same design, but a completely re-engineered GPU.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the AMD Radeon RX 7600S in OpenCL compared to the Radeon Pro 460?

A: The RX 7600S scores 68,012 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the Pro 460 scores 15,284. This is a delta of -77.5% from the Pro 460’s perspective, meaning the RX 7600S is approximately 4.4x faster.

Q: Does the Radeon Pro 460 win any benchmark against the RX 7600S?

A: No. In the two head-to-head tests available (Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan), the RX 7600S wins both. The Pro 460 has zero wins (winsA: 0) versus two wins for the RX 7600S (winsB: 2).

Q: How do these GPUs compare to their own nearest rivals?

A: The Pro 460’s nearest rival is the AMD Radeon Pro 560 (avg 17,551, delta -0.2%), showing they are nearly identical in performance. The RX 7600S’s nearest rival is the NVIDIA T400 (avg 16,508, delta 1.1%), with the RX 7600S slightly ahead.

Q: Which GPU has a higher percentile ranking among all GPUs?

A: The Pro 460 ranks in the 61st percentile, while the RX 7600S ranks in the 60th percentile. Despite the RX 7600S’s overwhelming head-to-head wins, the Pro 460 holds a one-point percentile advantage, likely due to different benchmark suites weighting.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each GPU?

A: The Pro 460 has an average benchmark score of 17,509, while the RX 7600S has an average of 16,696. The RX 7600S’s lower average reflects its inclusion of PassMark tests (e.g., DirectX 10 at 74, DirectX 12 at 65), which are not run on the Pro 460.

Q: How does the RX 7600S perform in DirectX 9 versus DirectX 12?

A: In PassMark tests, the RX 7600S scores 211 in DirectX 9, 140 in DirectX 11, 74 in DirectX 10, and 65 in DirectX 12. This indicates older API workloads run relatively better on this architecture.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the AMD Radeon RX 7600S is the superior GPU for any workload that leverages OpenCL or Vulkan. Its 68,012 OpenCL score versus 15,284 for the Pro 460 represents a 4.4x performance advantage that cannot be bridged by driver optimizations or overclocking. The Pro 460’s only redeeming statistic is its higher percentile ranking (61 vs 60), but this is misleading given the RX 7600S’s dominance in direct comparisons. For users choosing between these two, the RX 7600S is the only rational pick for compute-heavy tasks, modern gaming, or any application that can utilize DirectX 12 Ultimate features.

However, the Pro 460 is not without context. Its 1.858 TFLOPS FP32 and 81.28 GB/s memory bandwidth were adequate for its 2016 era, and its 35 W TDP makes it a low-power integrated solution. The RX 7600S, at 75 W TDP, demands more power but delivers 15.77 TFLOPS and 256.0 GB/s bandwidth—an 8.5x raw compute increase and 3.1x bandwidth increase. The verdict is that the RX 7600S belongs to a different performance class, and the Pro 460 should only be considered if power consumption is an absolute constraint and performance expectations are minimal.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every specification category. The Pro 460 uses a Baffin chip on a 14 nm process from GlobalFoundries, while the RX 7600S uses Navi 33 on a 6 nm process from TSMC. Transistor count jumps from 3,000 million to 13,300 million, and die size from 123 mm² to 204 mm². Transistor density improves from 24.4M / mm² to 65.2M / mm².

Clock speeds are dramatically different: the Pro 460 runs at 850 MHz base and 907 MHz boost, while the RX 7600S runs at 1500 MHz base and 2200 MHz boost, with a game clock of 1865 MHz. Memory configurations also diverge: the Pro 460 has 4 GB GDDR5 at 1270 MHz (5.1 Gbps effective) with 81.28 GB/s bandwidth, while the RX 7600S has 8 GB GDDR6 at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth. Both use 128-bit buses.

Compute resources scale accordingly: shading units increase from 1024 to 1792, TMUs from 64 to 112, and ROPs from 16 to 64. The RX 7600S adds 28 ray tracing cores, which the Pro 460 lacks entirely. Pixel rate improves from 14.51 GPixel/s to 140.8 GPixel/s, and texture rate from 58.05 GTexel/s to 246.4 GTexel/s. FP32 throughput rises from 1.858 TFLOPS to 15.77 TFLOPS, with FP16 jumping from 1.858 TFLOPS (1:1) to 31.54 TFLOPS (2:1). The bus interface upgrades from PCIe 3.0 x8 to PCIe 4.0 x16.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap is substantial. The Pro 460 uses GCN 4.0 architecture, a design that dates to 2016 and lacks dedicated ray tracing hardware. The RX 7600S uses RDNA 3.0, a modern architecture with 28 ray tracing cores and support for DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), whereas the Pro 460 only supports DirectX 12 (12_0). Vulkan support also advances from 1.3 on the Pro 460 to 1.4 on the RX 7600S.

The process node shift from 14 nm (GlobalFoundries) to 6 nm (TSMC) enables the RX 7600S to pack 13,300 million transistors into 204 mm², versus 3,000 million in 123 mm² for the Pro 460. This 4.4x transistor increase with only 1.7x die size growth explains the density improvement from 24.4M / mm² to 65.2M / mm². The RX 7600S’s FP16 performance of 31.54 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio) indicates it has dedicated FP16 throughput, unlike the Pro 460’s 1:1 ratio, which is a key advantage for AI and compute workloads.

The RX 7600S is part of the Navi Mobile (RX 7000M) generation with the codename "Hotpink Bonefish," succeeding Polaris Mobile. The Pro 460 belongs to the Radeon Pro Mac (400 Series) generation. Production status differs: the Pro 460 is end-of-life, while the RX 7600S is active. Release dates are separated by over six years (2016 vs 2023), and both have no launch MSRP listed.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon RX 7600S wins in every measurable category. It dominates OpenCL and Vulkan benchmarks, offers 8 GB VRAM versus 4 GB, and provides 28 ray tracing cores for hardware-accelerated ray tracing. Its compute capabilities—15.77 TFLOPS FP32 and 31.54 TFLOPS FP16—make it suitable for modern workloads like machine learning inference, video rendering, and high-refresh-rate gaming. The PCIe 4.0 x16 interface doubles the bandwidth available to the Pro 460’s PCIe 3.0 x8, which matters for data transfer in professional applications.

The AMD Radeon Pro 460’s only theoretical advantages are its lower 35 W TDP and its higher percentile ranking (61st vs 60th). At less than half the power draw of the RX 7600S, the Pro 460 could be preferable in ultra-portable or passively-cooled systems where thermal headroom is nonexistent. Its 81.28 GB/s bandwidth and 1.858 TFLOPS are sufficient for basic 2D desktop acceleration, legacy DirectX 11 titles, or light productivity tasks. However, the data shows no benchmark where the Pro 460 outperforms the RX 7600S, making any use-case advantage purely speculative and not backed by performance metrics. For users who value raw performance, modern API support, and future-proofing, the RX 7600S is the definitive choice.