AMD Radeon Pro 5300 vs AMD Radeon RX 5300M Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only directly comparable benchmark between the AMD Radeon Pro 5300 and the AMD Radeon RX 5300M is Geekbench OpenCL. In that test, the Radeon Pro 5300 scores 38,747 points, while the RX 5300M scores 36,529 points. This yields a 6.1% advantage for the Pro 5300, marking the sole head-to-head win for either card. The delta is modest but consistent, suggesting the Pro 5300 holds a measurable edge in raw compute throughput under OpenCL workloads.

Looking at the broader benchmark context, the Pro 5300 also has results in Geekbench Metal and Vulkan, scoring 48,070 and 35,793 respectively. The RX 5300M has no corresponding entries in those tests, so cross-API comparisons are impossible from the available data. The Pro 5300's average benchmark score across all tests is 40,870, while the RX 5300M's average is just 36,529, reflecting the fact that the Pro 5300 has three benchmark entries versus the RX 5300M's single entry.

When placed against their nearest rivals, the Pro 5300's average score of 40,870 sits within 1.4% of the AMD Radeon Pro 580 (40,318) and 2% of the AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 (40,063). It trails the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti (41,187) by just 0.8% and beats the RTX 5070 (40,377) by 1.2%. The RX 5300M's average of 36,529 is effectively tied with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN X (36,530, 0% delta), 0.7% ahead of the NVIDIA T1000 (36,289), and 1.9% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro Duo (35,860). It trails the AMD Radeon PRO W6400 (37,157) by 1.7%.

The percentile rankings reinforce the gap: the Pro 5300 sits at the 82nd percentile of all GPUs, while the RX 5300M sits at the 80th. That two-percentile difference is small in absolute terms but aligns with the 6.1% OpenCL delta. In practical terms, the Pro 5300 is the faster card, but the RX 5300M is not far behind in the one metric where they can be directly compared.

Where Each One Wins

The Pro 5300 wins the only direct head-to-head test, so it takes the compute crown in OpenCL. Its 6.1% lead in that workload suggests better sustained throughput for general-purpose GPU compute tasks, which aligns with its workstation-oriented positioning. The Pro 5300 also demonstrates strength across multiple API benchmarks, with its Metal score (48,070) being notably higher than its OpenCL (38,747) or Vulkan (35,793) results. This indicates the card is particularly well-tuned for Apple's Metal API, likely reflecting its integration into Mac systems.

The RX 5300M, despite losing the head-to-head, has its own advantages in the data. It carries more shading units (1,408 versus 1,280), more texture mapping units (88 versus 80), and a higher game clock (1,181 MHz versus no game clock listed for the Pro 5300). Its boost clock is lower at 1,445 MHz versus 1,650 MHz, but the extra execution resources partially compensate. The RX 5300M also has a slightly higher FP32 throughput at 4.069 TFLOPS versus 4.224 TFLOPS for the Pro 5300 — wait, that is actually lower. The Pro 5300 edges it out there too, but only by 3.8%.

Where the RX 5300M genuinely wins is in memory configuration flexibility for mobile use. It uses a 96-bit bus with 3 GB of GDDR6, while the Pro 5300 uses a 128-bit bus with 4 GB. The Pro 5300's bandwidth is 224.0 GB/s versus 168.0 GB/s for the RX 5300M, so the Pro 5300 is clearly superior in memory throughput. The RX 5300M's smaller frame buffer may be a limitation in VRAM-heavy workloads, but for a mobile part, the lower memory footprint could translate to lower power consumption in practice, even though both are rated at the same 85 W TDP.

Architecture Differences

Both cards are built on the same Navi 14 chip, using the RDNA 1.0 architecture, fabricated on TSMC's 7 nm process. Both have 6,400 million transistors on a 158 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 40.5M per mm². The fundamental silicon is identical; the differences come from how AMD configures and clocks it.

The Pro 5300 has 1,280 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. Its base clock is 1,000 MHz with a boost of 1,650 MHz. The RX 5300M has 1,408 shading units, 88 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. Its base clock matches at 1,000 MHz, but the boost is lower at 1,445 MHz, with a game clock of 1,181 MHz. The Pro 5300's higher boost clock gives it a pixel rate of 52.80 GPixel/s versus 46.24 GPixel/s for the RX 5300M, and a texture rate of 132.0 GTexel/s versus 127.2 GTexel/s. In FP32 compute, the Pro 5300 delivers 4.224 TFLOPS versus 4.069 TFLOPS, and in FP16 it delivers 8.448 TFLOPS versus 8.138 TFLOPS, both using a 2:1 ratio.

Memory is a major differentiator. The Pro 5300 uses 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, achieving 224.0 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 5300M uses 3 GB of GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus, achieving 168.0 GB/s. Both run at 1,750 MHz (14 Gbps effective), but the narrower bus on the RX 5300M caps its bandwidth. Neither card has dedicated ray tracing or tensor cores, consistent with RDNA 1.0's feature set.

The Pro 5300 is listed as having an IGP slot width with no display outputs and no power connectors, suggesting it is designed for integration into a system board, likely a Mac. The RX 5300M has "Portable Device Dependent" display outputs, meaning its connectivity is dictated by the laptop it ships in. Both use PCIe 4.0 x8. The Pro 5300 has a suggested PSU of 250 W, while the RX 5300M has no suggested PSU listed. The Pro 5300 was released on 2020-08-03, while the RX 5300M came earlier on 2019-11-12. The RX 5300M lists "Polaris Mobile" as its predecessor, while the Pro 5300 has no predecessor listed. Both are end-of-life products.

The Verdict

From the data, the AMD Radeon Pro 5300 is the faster card. It wins the only shared benchmark by 6.1%, has a higher average benchmark score (40,870 versus 36,529), and sits at a higher percentile rank (82nd versus 80th). Its memory subsystem is decisively better: 4 GB on a 128-bit bus with 224.0 GB/s bandwidth versus 3 GB on a 96-bit bus with 168.0 GB/s. For compute workloads, the Pro 5300's higher boost clock (1,650 MHz versus 1,445 MHz) more than compensates for the RX 5300M's extra shading units, resulting in higher pixel rate, texture rate, and FP32 throughput.

The RX 5300M is not without merit. Its higher shading unit count (1,408) and TMU count (88) suggest it could be more efficient in certain shader-bound scenarios if clock speeds were equal, but they are not. The lower boost clock and reduced memory bandwidth make it the weaker part in most measurable ways. Its only advantage is being released earlier (2019-11-12 versus 2020-08-03) and having a game clock specification, which the Pro 5300 lacks entirely.

For a user choosing between these two, the data points clearly to the Pro 5300. It delivers better performance in the one benchmark where both are tested, has a larger and faster memory configuration, and achieves higher peak throughput across all compute metrics. The RX 5300M would be the choice only if the specific laptop form factor requires it, as its display output is dependent on the portable device. The Pro 5300 has no display outputs at all, so it is not a drop-in replacement for a mobile GPU. But as a pure performance comparison, the Pro 5300 wins every measurable category. The RX 5300M's 80th percentile ranking is respectable, but the Pro 5300's 82nd percentile — combined with its 6.1% head-to-head lead — makes the verdict unambiguous.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 5300 has an average benchmark score of 40,870, while the AMD Radeon RX 5300M has an average of 36,529.

Q: How much faster is the Radeon Pro 5300 in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The Pro 5300 scores 38,747 versus 36,529 for the RX 5300M, a 6.1% advantage.

Q: Do both GPUs use the same chip and architecture?

A: Yes, both use the Navi 14 chip with RDNA 1.0 architecture on TSMC's 7 nm process, with 6,400 million transistors on a 158 mm² die.

Q: What are the memory differences between the two cards?

A: The Pro 5300 has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 224.0 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 5300M has 3 GB of GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus with 168.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The RX 5300M has 1,408 shading units, while the Pro 5300 has 1,280. However, the Pro 5300 still achieves higher FP32 throughput at 4.224 TFLOPS versus 4.069 TFLOPS.

Q: What is the release date of each GPU?

A: The Radeon Pro 5300 was released on 2020-08-03, and the Radeon RX 5300M was released on 2019-11-12.