AMD Radeon Pro 5300 vs AMD Radeon RX 7900 GRE Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data includes two direct head-to-head comparisons between the AMD Radeon Pro 5300 and the AMD Radeon RX 7900 GRE. The RX 7900 GRE wins both. The gap is decisive. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 7900 GRE scores 175758 against the Pro 5300's 38747. That is a 78% deficit for the Pro 5300, meaning the RX 7900 GRE delivers roughly 4.5 times the compute throughput in this workload. The Pro 5300 trails by a margin that places it firmly in a different performance class.

The second head-to-head test, Geekbench Vulkan, shows a similar story. The RX 7900 GRE posts 99850, while the Pro 5300 manages 35793. The delta is 64.2%, again favoring the newer card. While the percentage gap is smaller than in OpenCL, the absolute difference remains enormous: the RX 7900 GRE is nearly three times faster in this API test. The Pro 5300 wins zero head-to-head benchmarks in the database, while the RX 7900 GRE wins both.

Context from the broader benchmark pool reinforces this separation. The Pro 5300 has an average benchmark score of 40870 across all recorded tests, placing it at the 82nd percentile among all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti (avg 41187, delta -0.8%), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 (avg 40377, delta 1.2%), and the AMD Radeon Pro 580 (avg 40318, delta 1.4%). The Pro 5300 sits within a few percentage points of these cards, indicating that its 40870 average is competitive with much more recent hardware in aggregate scoring.

The RX 7900 GRE, however, presents a more complex picture. Its average benchmark score is 32456, placing it at the 77th percentile, lower than the Pro 5300's percentile. This is counterintuitive given the head-to-head results. The explanation lies in the benchmark mix. The RX 7900 GRE's recorded tests include several Passmark suites with low scores: Passmark DirectX 10 (139), DirectX 11 (300), DirectX 12 (107), DirectX 9 (310), G2D (1180), G3D (27089), and GPU Compute (15016). These low-end scores drag down its average. The Pro 5300 only has three Geekbench results, all relatively high, which inflates its aggregate. The nearest rivals for the RX 7900 GRE reflect this: AMD FirePro S10000 (avg 32388, delta 0.2%), AMD FirePro S9300 X2 (avg 32540, delta -0.3%), and AMD Radeon RX 590 GME (avg 32601, delta -0.4%). The RX 7900 GRE is essentially tied with these legacy cards in average score, despite being vastly faster in compute-heavy workloads.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different eras of AMD's GPU design. The Pro 5300 uses the Navi 14 chip built on RDNA 1.0 architecture, fabricated on a 7 nm process at TSMC. The RX 7900 GRE uses Navi 31, based on RDNA 3.0, on a 5 nm process, also at TSMC. The process node shrink is significant, but the architectural leap is larger. RDNA 1.0 was AMD's first generation of the RDNA family, while RDNA 3.0 represents the third iteration with substantial changes to compute units, ray tracing, and memory hierarchy.

The transistor counts tell a stark story. The Pro 5300 packs 6,400 million transistors on a 158 mm² die, yielding a density of 40.5M per mm². The RX 7900 GRE integrates 57,700 million transistors on a 529 mm² die, with a density of 109.1M per mm². That is roughly nine times the transistor count and nearly three times the die area. The density improvement reflects both the smaller process node and the more complex architecture.

Memory configurations diverge sharply. The Pro 5300 has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Memory clock is 1750 MHz, with 14 Gbps effective. The RX 7900 GRE has 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, with 576.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Memory clock is 2250 MHz, with 18 Gbps effective. The RX 7900 GRE offers four times the capacity and roughly 2.5 times the bandwidth. The Pro 5300's memory clock is lower, and its effective data rate is 14 Gbps versus 18 Gbps.

Compute resources differ by a factor of four. The Pro 5300 has 1280 shading units, 80 texture mapping units, and 32 raster operation pipelines. The RX 7900 GRE has 5120 shading units, 320 TMUs, and 160 ROPs. The RX 7900 GRE also includes 80 ray tracing cores, while the Pro 5300 has none. This means the RX 7900 GRE can accelerate ray-traced workloads in hardware, a capability the Pro 5300 lacks entirely.

Clock speeds also favor the RX 7900 GRE. The Pro 5300 runs at 1000 MHz base and 1650 MHz boost. The RX 7900 GRE runs at 1287 MHz base, 1880 MHz game clock, and 2245 MHz boost. The boost clock is roughly 36% higher. Combined with the fourfold increase in shading units, the peak FP32 throughput jumps from 4.224 TFLOPS on the Pro 5300 to 45.98 TFLOPS on the RX 7900 GRE. FP16 performance scales similarly: 8.448 TFLOPS versus 91.96 TFLOPS, both at a 2:1 ratio.

Other architectural differences include the bus interface. The Pro 5300 uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the RX 7900 GRE uses PCIe 4.0 x16. The RX 7900 GRE also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), whereas the Pro 5300 supports DirectX 12 (12_1). Both cards support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4. The RX 7900 GRE has display outputs (1x HDMI 2.1a, 2x DisplayPort 2.1, 1x USB Type-C), while the Pro 5300 has no outputs, reflecting its use case as an integrated GPU for Mac systems.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 7900 GRE wins every recorded head-to-head benchmark, so its dominance in raw compute is unambiguous. It is the clear choice for any workload that leverages OpenCL or Vulkan, which includes most modern gaming, 3D rendering, and GPU compute tasks. Its 80 ray tracing cores provide hardware acceleration for ray-traced effects, a feature the Pro 5300 cannot offer. The 16 GB memory capacity and 576.0 GB/s bandwidth enable large datasets, high-resolution textures, and compute workloads that would exceed the Pro 5300's 4 GB frame buffer.

The Pro 5300, despite losing all head-to-head tests, still has a niche. Its average benchmark score of 40870 places it higher than the RX 7900 GRE's 32456, and its 82nd percentile ranking exceeds the RX 7900 GRE's 77th. This suggests that in the specific Geekbench tests recorded for the Pro 5300, it performs respectably relative to the broader GPU population. Its 85 W TDP and integrated form factor (IGP slot width, no power connectors) make it suitable for compact, power-constrained systems. The suggested PSU of 250 W is far below the RX 7900 GRE's 600 W requirement. The Pro 5300 also has a lower boost clock, but its efficiency per watt is likely higher given the massive TDP difference.

For compute-heavy tasks that fit within 4 GB of memory, the Pro 5300 can still deliver competitive results in Geekbench OpenCL (38747) and Vulkan (35793), though these numbers are dwarfed by the RX 7900 GRE. The Pro 5300's production status is end-of-life, while the RX 7900 GRE is active. The RX 7900 GRE also has a successor (Navi IV), indicating it is part of an ongoing product line, whereas the Pro 5300 has no successor listed.

The Verdict

The data is one-sided. The AMD Radeon RX 7900 GRE is the superior card in every recorded head-to-head comparison, with 78% and 64.2% leads in OpenCL and Vulkan respectively. Its architectural advantages, including 5120 shading units, 80 ray tracing cores, 16 GB of GDDR6, and 45.98 TFLOPS FP32, make it the obvious choice for gaming, rendering, and compute workloads. The only caveat is its lower average benchmark score (32456) and percentile ranking (77th), but those figures are skewed by low Passmark scores in legacy DirectX tests that do not reflect modern workloads.

The AMD Radeon Pro 5300, despite its end-of-life status, still offers a respectable 40870 average benchmark score and 82nd percentile ranking. Its 85 W TDP and integrated form factor make it suitable for systems where power and space are constrained. However, its 4 GB memory, 128-bit bus, and lack of ray tracing cores limit it to lighter workloads. Users who need maximum compute performance, large memory capacity, or ray tracing should choose the RX 7900 GRE. Users with strict power limits, or those who need a GPU with no external power connectors, may find the Pro 5300 adequate, but they must accept a massive performance deficit.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 5300 has an average benchmark score of 40870, compared to the AMD Radeon RX 7900 GRE's 32456. The Pro 5300 also ranks higher at the 82nd percentile versus the RX 7900 GRE's 77th.

Q: How much faster is the RX 7900 GRE in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The RX 7900 GRE scores 175758, while the Pro 5300 scores 38747. The delta is 78% in favor of the RX 7900 GRE.

Q: Does the Pro 5300 support ray tracing?

A: No, the Pro 5300 has no ray tracing cores. The RX 7900 GRE has 80 ray tracing cores.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference?

A: The Pro 5300 has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 224.0 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 7900 GRE has 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 576.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which card has a higher boost clock?

A: The RX 7900 GRE has a boost clock of 2245 MHz, while the Pro 5300 has a boost clock of 1650 MHz.

Q: What is the TDP difference?

A: The Pro 5300 has a TDP of 85 W with no power connectors and a suggested PSU of 250 W. The RX 7900 GRE has a TDP of 260 W, requires 2x 8-pin power connectors, and a suggested PSU of 600 W.

Specification Differences

| Field | AMD Radeon Pro 5300 | AMD Radeon RX 7900 GRE |

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

| Chip | Navi 14 | Navi 31 |

| Architecture | RDNA 1.0 | RDNA 3.0 |

| Codename | None | Plum Bonito |

| Generation | Radeon Pro Mac (Navi Series) | Navi III (RX 7000) |

| Process Node | 7 nm | 5 nm |

| Transistors | 6,400 million | 57,700 million |

| Die Size | 158 mm² | 529 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 40.5M / mm² | 109.1M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1000 MHz | 1287 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1650 MHz | 2245 MHz |

| Game Clock | None | 1880 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) | 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 4 GB | 16 GB |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 224.0 GB/s | 576.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 1280 | 5120 |

| TMUs | 80 | 320 |

| ROPs | 32 | 160 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | None | 80 |

| Pixel Rate | 52.80 GPixel/s | 359.2 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 132.0 GTexel/s | 718.4 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 4.224 TFLOPS | 45.98 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 8.448 TFLOPS (2:1) | 91.96 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 85 W | 260 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | 2x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 250 W | 600 W |

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

| Display Outputs | No outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1a, 2x DisplayPort 2.1, 1x USB Type-C |

| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |

| Production Status | End-of-life | Active |

| Release Date | 2020-08-03 | 2023-07-26 |

| Predecessor | None | Navi II |

| Successor | None | Navi IV |

| Launch MSRP | None listed | 549 USD |

| Dimensions | Not listed | 276 mm length, 110 mm height, 51 mm width |