AMD Radeon Pro 5300 vs NVIDIA TITAN V Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data in the database covers two compute-oriented workloads, and the results are decisively one-sided. In Geekbench OpenCL, the NVIDIA TITAN V scores 157,265, while the AMD Radeon Pro 5300 records 38,747. That puts the TITAN V ahead by 75.4%, a massive margin that reflects a fundamental gap in raw compute throughput. The Geekbench Vulkan result tells a similar story: the TITAN V reaches 152,117 against the Radeon Pro 5300's 35,793, a lead of 76.5%. Both deltas are negative from the AMD card's perspective, meaning it trails by roughly three-quarters of the TITAN V's score in each test.

Looking at the broader database averages, the TITAN V has an average benchmark score of 34,355 across all recorded tests, while the Radeon Pro 5300 averages 40,870. The AMD card actually sits higher in the aggregate because its recorded benchmark set is limited to Geekbench Metal, OpenCL, and Vulkan, tests where it performs relatively well. The TITAN V carries a much larger and more varied benchmark suite, including older DirectX and Passmark tests that pull its average down. In the direct head-to-head tests, however, there is no ambiguity: the TITAN V wins both, and wins big.

The percentile rankings place the Radeon Pro 5300 at the 82nd percentile among all GPUs, while the TITAN V sits at the 79th. This is somewhat counterintuitive given the head-to-head results, but it reflects the differing test coverage. The Radeon Pro 5300's nearest rivals by average score include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti at 41,187 (0.8% higher), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 at 40,377 (1.2% higher), the AMD Radeon Pro 580 at 40,318 (1.4% higher), and the AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100 at 40,063 (2.0% higher). The TITAN V's nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon HD 7970 at 34,541 (0.5% higher), the NVIDIA T1000 8 GB at 34,561 (0.6% higher), the NVIDIA RTX A1000 at 34,207 (0.4% lower), and the NVIDIA RTX A2000 12 GB at 34,154 (0.6% lower). These groupings show that the TITAN V, despite its enormous compute advantage in the head-to-head tests, is surrounded by far more modest cards in average score because its legacy DirectX results are weak.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different architectural eras and different design philosophies. The AMD Radeon Pro 5300 uses the Navi 14 chip built on RDNA 1.0 architecture, manufactured on a 7 nm process at TSMC. The die size is 158 mm² and it packs 6,400 million transistors, yielding a transistor density of 40.5 million per mm². The NVIDIA TITAN V uses the GV100 chip on Volta architecture, built on a 12 nm process, also at TSMC. Its die is far larger at 815 mm², with 21,100 million transistors, but the density is lower at 25.9 million per mm². The Radeon Pro 5300 is the denser chip, but the TITAN V is the larger and more complex one.

Memory configurations diverge sharply. The Radeon Pro 5300 has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Memory clock is 1750 MHz, which the database records as 14 Gbps effective. The TITAN V has 12 GB of HBM2 on a 3072-bit bus, delivering 651.3 GB/s, nearly three times the bandwidth. Its memory clock is 848 MHz, or 1696 Mbps effective. The bus width difference is the dominant factor: the TITAN V's 3072-bit interface is 24 times wider than the AMD card's 128-bit bus.

Compute resources also differ by a wide margin. The Radeon Pro 5300 has 1,280 shading units, 80 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The TITAN V has 5,120 shading units, 320 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. The TITAN V also includes 640 tensor cores, which the Radeon Pro 5300 lacks entirely. Neither card has ray tracing cores. Pixel throughput is 52.80 GPixel/s for the AMD card versus 139.7 GPixel/s for the TITAN V. Texture rate is 132.0 GTexel/s versus 465.6 GTexel/s. Floating-point performance shows the biggest gap: the Radeon Pro 5300 delivers 4.224 TFLOPS FP32 and 8.448 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1), while the TITAN V delivers 14.90 TFLOPS FP32 and 29.80 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1). The TITAN V is roughly 3.5 times faster in FP32 and FP16.

Clock behavior is notable. The Radeon Pro 5300 has a base clock of 1000 MHz and a boost of 1650 MHz, a 65% boost headroom. The TITAN V has a base of 1200 MHz and a boost of 1455 MHz, only 21% above base. The AMD card boosts more aggressively, but it starts from a lower base and has far fewer compute units.

Power and physical design differ as well. The Radeon Pro 5300 has a TDP of 85 W, is an IGP form factor with no power connectors, and requires a suggested 250 W PSU. It has no display outputs and connects via PCIe 4.0 x8. The TITAN V has a TDP of 250 W, is dual-slot, uses 1x 6-pin and 1x 8-pin power connectors, and requires a suggested 600 W PSU. It connects via PCIe 3.0 x16 and provides 1x HDMI 2.0 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. Physical dimensions for the TITAN V are 267 mm length, 112 mm height, and 40 mm width. The Radeon Pro 5300 has no recorded dimensions.

Both cards support DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API compatibility is not a differentiator.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA TITAN V is the clear winner in compute-heavy workloads. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 157,265 is more than four times the Radeon Pro 5300's 38,747, and its Vulkan score of 152,117 is similarly dominant against 35,793. The 640 tensor cores and 5,120 shading units give it a massive advantage in any workload that scales with parallel compute. The 12 GB HBM2 memory with 651.3 GB/s bandwidth also makes it the better choice for large datasets that exceed the Radeon Pro 5300's 4 GB GDDR6 pool. The 3072-bit bus is a structural advantage that no clock speed or architectural efficiency on the AMD side can compensate for.

The Radeon Pro 5300's wins are more situational. Its average benchmark score of 40,870 is higher than the TITAN V's 34,355, driven by strong Geekbench Metal performance at 48,070, a test the TITAN V does not appear in. Its 82nd percentile ranking versus the TITAN V's 79th reflects that these are different cards for different purposes. The Radeon Pro 5300 also has a much lower TDP at 85 W versus 250 W, making it suitable for compact systems with minimal power delivery, and its IGP form factor with no power connectors means it can be integrated into systems where a dual-slot, externally powered card would not fit. The PCIe 4.0 x8 interface provides higher per-lane bandwidth than the TITAN V's PCIe 3.0 x16, though the TITAN V has more total lanes.

For professional workloads that use Metal on macOS, the Radeon Pro 5300's 48,070 Geekbench Metal score is the only recorded Metal result between the two, giving it an uncontested win in that specific API. For OpenCL and Vulkan, the TITAN V is overwhelmingly faster. The Radeon Pro 5300's OpenCL score of 38,747 is less than a quarter of the TITAN V's, and its Vulkan score of 35,793 is similarly dwarfed.

The Verdict

The data supports a straightforward conclusion. For any workload that relies on OpenCL or Vulkan compute, the NVIDIA TITAN V is in a different class. Its 75.4% lead in OpenCL and 76.5% lead in Vulkan are not marginal advantages; they are generational gaps. The TITAN V's 14.90 TFLOPS FP32 and 29.80 TFLOPS FP16, combined with 651.3 GB/s of memory bandwidth and 12 GB of HBM2, make it the obvious choice for compute-intensive rendering, simulation, or machine learning tasks that can use its tensor cores.

The Radeon Pro 5300 is the better fit for a narrower set of scenarios. Its 85 W TDP, IGP form factor, and lack of external power connectors make it suitable for systems where the TITAN V physically cannot be installed. Its Geekbench Metal score of 48,070 is the strongest recorded result between the two in any single test, and its 82nd percentile overall ranking exceeds the TITAN V's 79th. For macOS environments where Metal is the primary API, the Radeon Pro 5300 is the only one of the two with a recorded Metal score. Its 4 GB of GDDR6 and 224.0 GB/s bandwidth are modest, but the card's 7 nm process and 40.5M/mm² transistor density show a modern, efficient design.

The launch MSRP for the TITAN V was 2,999 USD, and the Radeon Pro 5300 has no recorded launch MSRP. Both cards are end-of-life. The TITAN V was released in December 2017, while the Radeon Pro 5300 came later in August 2020. The TITAN V's predecessor is the GeForce 900 series and its successor is the GeForce 20 series; the Radeon Pro 5300 has no recorded predecessor or successor.

FAQ

Q: Which card wins in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The NVIDIA TITAN V scores 157,265 versus the AMD Radeon Pro 5300's 38,747, a lead of 75.4%.

Q: How do the two cards compare in Geekbench Vulkan?

A: The TITAN V scores 152,117 and the Radeon Pro 5300 scores 35,793, giving the TITAN V a 76.5% advantage.

Q: What is the memory configuration of each card?

A: The Radeon Pro 5300 has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 224.0 GB/s bandwidth. The TITAN V has 12 GB of HBM2 on a 3072-bit bus with 651.3 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Does either card support ray tracing?

A: Neither card has ray tracing cores. The TITAN V does have 640 tensor cores, while the Radeon Pro 5300 has none.

Q: What are the power requirements?

A: The Radeon Pro 5300 has an 85 W TDP, no power connectors, and a suggested 250 W PSU. The TITAN V has a 250 W TDP, uses 1x 6-pin and 1x 8-pin connectors, and requires a suggested 600 W PSU.

Q: How do their overall percentile rankings compare?

A: The Radeon Pro 5300 is at the 82nd percentile among all GPUs, while the TITAN V is at the 79th. The Radeon Pro 5300 also has a higher average benchmark score of 40,870 versus 34,355 for the TITAN V.