AMD Radeon Pro 5300M vs AMD Radeon RX 6500 XT Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6500 XT records an average benchmark score of 11842, while the AMD Radeon Pro 5300M averages 10013. This places the RX 6500 XT in the 51st percentile of all GPUs, compared to the 48th percentile for the Pro 5300M.

Q: How large is the gap in synthetic compute performance?

A: The RX 6500 XT leads by 65.1% in Geekbench OpenCL (48289 vs 29252) and by 96.1% in Geekbench Vulkan (54724 vs 27912). These are the two largest percentage advantages recorded in the head-to-head data.

Q: Does the Pro 5300M win any benchmark in the comparison?

A: No. The RX 6500 XT wins all 9 head-to-head benchmark tests. The Pro 5300M records zero wins, with its closest result being a 35% deficit in Passmark DirectX 9.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference, and does it matter?

A: The Pro 5300M has a 128-bit bus and 192.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the RX 6500 XT uses a 64-bit bus with 143.9 GB/s. Despite lower bandwidth, the RX 6500 XT still wins every benchmark, suggesting its higher clock speeds and newer architecture compensate.

Q: Which GPU has a higher TDP?

A: The RX 6500 XT is rated at 107 W, while the Pro 5300M is rated at 85 W. The RX 6500 XT also requires a 6-pin power connector and a 300 W suggested PSU, whereas the Pro 5300M has no power connectors listed.

Q: How does the RX 6500 XT compare to its nearest rivals in the database?

A: The RX 6500 XT sits within 1.9% of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 (11960), 1.3% behind the GTX 960A (11998), 1.4% ahead of the GTX 1660 (11680), and 1.9% ahead of the AMD RX 7800 XT (11627). Its average score of 11842 places it near these cards.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations. The RX 6500 XT is built on RDNA 2.0, while the Pro 5300M uses RDNA 1.0. This is a fundamental difference, as RDNA 2.0 introduces hardware ray tracing support, which the Pro 5300M lacks entirely. The RX 6500 XT includes 16 dedicated ray tracing cores, whereas the Pro 5300M has no RT cores listed.

Process technology also differs. The RX 6500 XT is fabricated on TSMC's 6 nm node, while the Pro 5300M uses the older 7 nm node. This contributes to a significant die size difference: the RX 6500 XT's Navi 24 chip measures 107 mm² with 5,400 million transistors, while the Pro 5300M's Navi 14 chip is larger at 158 mm² with 6,400 million transistors. The transistor density is notably higher on the newer chip, at 50.5M per mm² versus 40.5M per mm².

Clock speeds are dramatically different. The RX 6500 XT has a base clock of 2310 MHz and a boost clock of 2815 MHz, with a game clock of 2610 MHz. The Pro 5300M runs at a base of 1000 MHz and a boost of 1250 MHz, less than half the RX 6500 XT's boost. This clock advantage drives most of the performance gap, as the Pro 5300M actually has more shading units, texture mapping units, and a wider memory bus.

The RX 6500 XT supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the Pro 5300M is limited to DirectX 12 (12_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4. The memory configuration differs as well: both have 4 GB of GDDR6, but the RX 6500 XT uses a 64-bit bus with 143.9 GB/s bandwidth, while the Pro 5300M has a 128-bit bus with 192.0 GB/s. The RX 6500 XT runs memory at 18 Gbps effective, versus 12 Gbps on the Pro 5300M.

The bus interface is another difference: the RX 6500 XT uses PCIe 4.0 x4, while the Pro 5300M uses PCIe 4.0 x8. Display outputs also differ: the RX 6500 XT has one HDMI 2.1 and one DisplayPort 1.4a, while the Pro 5300M is listed as "Portable Device Dependent" because it is designed for mobile Mac systems.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The RX 6500 XT dominates the entire benchmark suite. The largest margin is in Passmark DirectX 11, where the RX 6500 XT scores 90 versus 37 for the Pro 5300M, a 143.2% advantage. This is followed by Geekbench Vulkan with a 96.1% lead (54724 vs 27912). The RX 6500 XT also wins Passmark GPU Compute by 67.6% (4456 vs 2658) and Passmark DirectX 10 by 66.7% (60 vs 36).

Geekbench OpenCL shows a 65.1% advantage for the RX 6500 XT (48289 vs 29252). Passmark G3D, a general 3D graphics score, favors the RX 6500 XT by 62.4% (9608 vs 5918). In Passmark DirectX 12, the RX 6500 XT leads by 52% (38 vs 25), and in Passmark G2D by 40% (815 vs 582). The smallest win is in Passmark DirectX 9, where the RX 6500 XT is 35% ahead (108 vs 80).

These results show a consistent pattern. The RX 6500 XT is not just faster in one area; it leads across DirectX 9, 10, 11, and 12, as well as in compute and 2D workloads. The Pro 5300M's wider memory bandwidth (192.0 vs 143.9 GB/s) does not translate into any benchmark win, as the RX 6500 XT's much higher clock speeds overcome the memory bus disadvantage.

The closest head-to-head result is Passmark DirectX 9, where the RX 6500 XT leads by 35%. The largest gap is Passmark DirectX 11 at 143.2%. On average, the RX 6500 XT is roughly 65% faster across the tested workloads.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon RX 6500 XT | AMD Radeon Pro 5300M |

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

| Architecture | RDNA 2.0 | RDNA 1.0 |

| Process Node | 6 nm | 7 nm |

| Die Size | 107 mm² | 158 mm² |

| Transistors | 5,400 million | 6,400 million |

| Transistor Density | 50.5M / mm² | 40.5M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 2310 MHz | 1000 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2815 MHz | 1250 MHz |

| Game Clock | 2610 MHz | None |

| Memory Clock | 2248 MHz, 18 Gbps effective | 1500 MHz, 12 Gbps effective |

| Memory Bus Width | 64 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 143.9 GB/s | 192.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 1024 | 1280 |

| TMUs | 64 | 80 |

| ROPs | 32 | 32 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | 16 | None |

| Pixel Rate | 90.08 GPixel/s | 40.00 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 180.2 GTexel/s | 100.0 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 5.765 TFLOPS | 3.200 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 11.53 TFLOPS (2:1) | 6.400 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 107 W | 85 W |

| Power Connectors | 1x 6-pin | None |

| Suggested PSU | 300 W | None |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x4 | PCIe 4.0 x8 |

| Display Outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a | Portable Device Dependent |

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

| Release Date | 2022-01-18 | 2019-11-12 |

Where Each One Wins

The RX 6500 XT wins in every directly measured benchmark. It is particularly strong in DirectX 11 and Vulkan workloads, where its lead exceeds 90%. The RX 6500 XT also has a clear advantage in compute-heavy tasks, as shown by the 67.6% lead in Passmark GPU Compute and the 65.1% lead in Geekbench OpenCL. For users running modern games with DirectX 12 or Vulkan, the RX 6500 XT's ray tracing support and higher raw throughput make it the superior choice.

The Pro 5300M's only theoretical advantages are its wider memory bus and higher bandwidth, plus its lower TDP of 85 W versus 107 W. This makes it more power-efficient in a pure wattage sense, but the recorded benchmarks show no performance benefit. The Pro 5300M is also a mobile-oriented part with no display outputs of its own, as it relies on portable device integration. Its higher shading unit count (1280 vs 1024) does not translate into any wins, likely due to the massive clock speed disadvantage.

The RX 6500 XT also wins on architectural features. Its ray tracing cores and DirectX 12 Ultimate support give it a feature set the Pro 5300M cannot match. The RX 6500 XT supports the latest graphics API, while the Pro 5300M is capped at DirectX 12_1.

For users prioritizing raw performance, modern features, and desktop connectivity, the RX 6500 XT is the clear choice. The Pro 5300M, with its older architecture and lower clocks, is best suited for scenarios where low power consumption is critical and where the GPU is integrated into a proprietary portable device.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous. The AMD Radeon RX 6500 XT wins 9 out of 9 head-to-head benchmarks, with an average score of 11842 versus 10013 for the Pro 5300M. The RX 6500 XT is 65.1% faster in OpenCL, 96.1% faster in Vulkan, and 62.4% faster in Passmark G3D. Its nearest rivals are the GTX 1080, GTX 960A, GTX 1660, and RX 7800 XT, all within a narrow 2% range, which indicates the RX 6500 XT is a competitive midrange part.

The Pro 5300M, by contrast, sits near the Quadro K5100M and GTX 870M, with an average score that is 18.3% lower than the RX 6500 XT. Its higher memory bandwidth and larger transistor count do not help in practice, because the RX 6500 XT's 2815 MHz boost clock versus 1250 MHz is a decisive advantage. The RX 6500 XT also has a smaller die, newer process, and adds ray tracing, making it the more technically advanced product.

Anyone looking for a discrete GPU with modern features should pick the RX 6500 XT. It delivers higher scores in every category, supports the latest DirectX standard, and provides standard display outputs. The Pro 5300M is a legacy mobile part with no benchmark wins, no ray tracing, and no dedicated display outputs. For any workload measured in the database, the RX 6500 XT is the stronger GPU. The only reason to choose the Pro 5300M would be a system that requires its specific mobile form factor and lower power draw, but even then the performance gap is substantial.