AMD Radeon Pro 5300 vs AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The data for this comparison is one-sided, with the AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 winning all three recorded head-to-head tests. The largest margin comes in the Geekbench Vulkan test, where the Vega 64 scores 67,032 points against the Radeon Pro 5300's 35,793 points. That is a delta of 87.3%, meaning the Vega 64 nearly doubles the Pro 5300's output in this particular API workload.

The Geekbench OpenCL test shows a similarly decisive gap. The RX Vega 64 records 62,552 points, while the Radeon Pro 5300 manages 38,747 points. The 61.4% delta here underscores that the older GCN-based card is not merely competitive, it is substantially ahead in raw compute throughput. The smallest, yet still significant, margin appears in Geekbench Metal, where the Vega 64 scores 68,750 points versus 48,070 points for the Pro 5300, a 43% advantage.

When looking at the broader database averages, the RX Vega 64 posts an average benchmark score of 50,001, which places it in the 86th percentile of all GPUs. The Radeon Pro 5300, by contrast, has an average score of 40,870 and sits in the 82nd percentile. That 9,131-point gap in average scores translates into a meaningful separation in overall standing, even though both cards land in the upper tier of the database.

The nearest rivals listed for each card help contextualize their positions. The RX Vega 64's average score of 50,001 is nearly identical to the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti's 49,957, a delta of just 0.1%. It also sits just 0.5% ahead of the Intel Arc A550M (49,737) and 1.9% behind the AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT (50,951). The Vega 64 is 3.1% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT (48,477). For the Radeon Pro 5300, its 40,870 average is 0.8% behind the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti (41,187), 1.2% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 (40,377), 1.4% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro 580 (40,318), and 2% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 (40,063).

The benchmark results indicate that the RX Vega 64's compute advantage is not marginal. In every recorded test, it wins by double-digit percentages, and its average score is roughly 22% higher than the Pro 5300's. The Pro 5300, however, achieves its scores with far lower power draw, which is relevant for certain system configurations, but that does not change the fact that the Vega 64 is the faster card in every measured workload.

The Verdict

The verdict from the recorded data is straightforward: the AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 is the faster GPU in every benchmark category. Anyone prioritizing raw performance, especially in Vulkan or OpenCL workloads, should choose the Vega 64. Its 87.3% lead in Vulkan and 61.4% lead in OpenCL are decisive advantages that no amount of architectural refinement on the Pro 5300 side can overcome in these tests.

The Radeon Pro 5300 is not without its merits. It draws only 85 W compared to the Vega 64's 295 W, and it requires no external power connectors, making it suitable for systems with limited power delivery. Its 250 W suggested PSU is far lower than the Vega 64's 600 W requirement. However, the Pro 5300's 82nd percentile standing, while respectable, places it below the Vega 64's 86th percentile. The Pro 5300 also has no display outputs, which means it is designed for compute tasks in a host system rather than as a primary graphics output.

For users who need maximum compute performance in the tests recorded here, the RX Vega 64 is the clear pick. For users constrained by power budgets or physical space, the Pro 5300's integrated form factor and low power draw are compelling, but those who need performance should look at the Vega 64's numbers. The database shows a 43% to 87.3% advantage across the board, and that is the deciding factor.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different generations and process nodes. The RX Vega 64 uses the Vega 10 chip built on GCN 5.0 architecture, manufactured on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The Radeon Pro 5300 uses the Navi 14 chip with RDNA 1.0 architecture, built on a 7 nm process at TSMC. The process node difference is significant: 14 nm versus 7 nm, which contributes to the Pro 5300's lower power draw.

The Vega 10 chip packs 12,500 million transistors on a 495 mm² die, giving it a transistor density of 25.3 million per mm². The Navi 14 chip has 6,400 million transistors on a 158 mm² die, with a density of 40.5 million per mm². Despite the Pro 5300's higher density, the Vega 64's much larger chip provides far more compute resources.

The RX Vega 64 has 4,096 shading units, 256 texture mapping units, and 64 ROPs. The Radeon Pro 5300 has 1,280 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. This 3.2x difference in shading units explains much of the performance gap. The Vega 64's pixel rate is 98.94 GPixel/s versus 52.80 GPixel/s for the Pro 5300, and its texture rate is 395.8 GTexel/s versus 132.0 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 12.66 TFLOPS for the Vega 64 and 4.224 TFLOPS for the Pro 5300. FP16 performance is 25.33 TFLOPS and 8.448 TFLOPS respectively, both at a 2:1 ratio.

Memory configurations also differ substantially. The Vega 64 uses 8 GB of HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus, delivering 483.8 GB/s of bandwidth. The Pro 5300 uses 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, with 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Vega 64's memory bandwidth is more than double that of the Pro 5300, which matters for bandwidth-sensitive workloads. The Vega 64's memory clock is 945 MHz (1890 Mbps effective), while the Pro 5300 runs at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective), but the narrower bus limits the Pro 5300's overall throughput.

Clock speeds tell a different story. The Pro 5300 has a base clock of 1000 MHz and a boost clock of 1650 MHz. The Vega 64 has a base of 1247 MHz and a boost of 1546 MHz. The Pro 5300 boosts higher, but the Vega 64's massive resource count overcomes that clock advantage.

Both cards support DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan, though the Pro 5300 lists Vulkan 1.4 support versus 1.3 for the Vega 64. The Vega 64 offers 1x HDMI 2.0b and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, while the Pro 5300 has no display outputs. The Vega 64 is a dual-slot card at 280 mm long, 111 mm tall, and 40 mm wide, requiring 2x 8-pin power connectors and a 600 W PSU. The Pro 5300 is an integrated form factor with no power connectors and a 250 W suggested PSU, connected via PCIe 4.0 x8 versus the Vega 64's PCIe 3.0 x16. The Vega 64 was released on 2017-08-06, while the Pro 5300 came later on 2020-08-03. Both are end-of-life products.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in Geekbench Metal?

A: The AMD Radeon RX Vega 64, with a score of 68,750 versus 48,070 for the Radeon Pro 5300, a 43% advantage.

Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two cards?

A: The largest gap is in Geekbench Vulkan, where the RX Vega 64 scores 67,032 against the Pro 5300's 35,793, a delta of 87.3%.

Q: How do the power requirements compare?

A: The RX Vega 64 has a 295 W TDP and requires a 600 W PSU with 2x 8-pin connectors. The Radeon Pro 5300 has an 85 W TDP, needs a 250 W PSU, and uses no external power connectors.

Q: Does the Radeon Pro 5300 support display outputs?

A: No, the Radeon Pro 5300 has no display outputs. The RX Vega 64 offers 1x HDMI 2.0b and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a.

Q: How much memory does each card have?

A: The RX Vega 64 has 8 GB of HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus with 483.8 GB/s bandwidth. The Radeon Pro 5300 has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 224.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What are the average benchmark scores and percentiles?

A: The RX Vega 64 has an average benchmark score of 50,001, placing it in the 86th percentile. The Radeon Pro 5300 has an average score of 40,870, placing it in the 82nd percentile.

Where Each One Wins

The RX Vega 64 wins in every recorded benchmark category. In Geekbench Metal, it leads by 43%. In OpenCL, it leads by 61.4%. In Vulkan, it leads by 87.3%. For users running compute workloads that leverage any of these APIs, the Vega 64 is the superior choice. Its 12.66 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 483.8 GB/s of memory bandwidth provide a substantial foundation for demanding tasks. Its 8 GB of HBM2 memory also gives it twice the capacity of the Pro 5300, which is relevant for larger datasets.

The Radeon Pro 5300 wins in efficiency and integration. Its 85 W TDP is dramatically lower than the Vega 64's 295 W, and its 250 W PSU requirement means it can operate in systems where the Vega 64 would be impractical. The Pro 5300's integrated form factor and lack of power connectors make it suitable for compact or pre-built systems. Its 7 nm process and RDNA 1.0 architecture represent a newer design, and its 1650 MHz boost clock is higher than the Vega 64's 1546 MHz. However, these advantages do not translate into benchmark wins. The Pro 5300's 4.224 TFLOPS FP32 performance and 224.0 GB/s bandwidth are simply too far behind.

For compute performance, the RX Vega 64 is the clear winner. For low-power integrated deployment, the Pro 5300 has a role. The data does not support any scenario where the Pro 5300 outperforms the Vega 64 in the recorded tests, but its power profile makes it a viable option for constrained environments. Users who need performance should choose the Vega 64; users who need low power draw in an integrated package should consider the Pro 5300, accepting the significant performance trade-off.