AMD Radeon Pro 5300M vs AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT records an average benchmark score of 11627, while the AMD Radeon Pro 5300M averages 10013. The RX 7800 XT sits at the 51st percentile among all GPUs, compared to the Pro 5300M's 48th percentile.

Q: How do the two cards compare in DirectX 12 performance?

A: In PassMark DirectX 12, the RX 7800 XT scores 93 versus the Pro 5300M's 25, a 272% advantage for the newer card. The RX 7800 XT supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the Pro 5300M only reaches DirectX 12 (12_1).

Q: Is the Pro 5300M faster in any benchmark?

A: Yes, in Geekbench OpenCL the Pro 5300M scores 29252 against the RX 7800 XT's 18290, a 37.5% lead. This is the sole head-to-head win for the Pro 5300M out of nine recorded tests.

Q: What are the memory configurations of each card?

A: The RX 7800 XT has 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 624.1 GB/s bandwidth. The Pro 5300M has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 192.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU is more power efficient based on the data?

A: The Pro 5300M has a TDP of 85 W, whereas the RX 7800 XT draws 263 W. However, the RX 7800 XT delivers substantially higher frame rates and compute scores in most tests.

Q: What is the production status of each card?

A: The RX 7800 XT is listed as Active, while the Pro 5300M is End-of-life. The Pro 5300M released in November 2019, and the RX 7800 XT arrived in September 2023.

Architecture Differences

The RX 7800 XT is built on the Navi 32 chip using RDNA 3.0 architecture, while the Pro 5300M uses Navi 14 with RDNA 1.0. This generational gap shows in the process node: the RX 7800 XT uses a 5 nm process from TSMC, versus the 7 nm process of the Pro 5300M. The transistor counts differ dramatically: 28,100 million transistors on a 346 mm² die for the RX 7800 XT, compared to 6,400 million on 158 mm² for the Pro 5300M. Transistor density is 81.2 million per mm² for the newer card versus 40.5 million per mm² for the older one.

The RX 7800 XT packs 3840 shading units, 240 texture mapping units, and 96 ROPs, plus 60 ray tracing cores. The Pro 5300M has 1280 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, with no ray tracing cores listed. The clock speeds tell a similar story: the RX 7800 XT boosts to 2430 MHz with a base of 1295 MHz, while the Pro 5300M boosts to only 1250 MHz from a 1000 MHz base. The RX 7800 XT also includes a game clock of 2124 MHz, a feature absent from the Pro 5300M's specifications.

Memory architecture diverges sharply. The RX 7800 XT offers 16 GB of GDDR6 at 19.5 Gbps effective, yielding 624.1 GB/s bandwidth. The Pro 5300M has 4 GB at 12 Gbps effective, for 192.0 GB/s. The bus widths are 256-bit versus 128-bit, respectively. Pixel and texture rates scale accordingly: the RX 7800 XT reaches 233.3 GPixel/s and 583.2 GTexel/s, while the Pro 5300M manages 40.00 GPixel/s and 100.0 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 37.32 TFLOPS for the RX 7800 XT versus 3.200 TFLOPS for the Pro 5300M. Notably, the RX 7800 XT achieves FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, whereas the Pro 5300M runs FP16 at 2:1, meaning its FP16 output is 6.400 TFLOPS.

The RX 7800 XT supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), the Pro 5300M only DirectX 12 (12_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4. The RX 7800 XT uses a PCIe 4.0 x16 interface, while the Pro 5300M is limited to PCIe 4.0 x8. Display outputs also differ: the RX 7800 XT offers 1x HDMI 2.1a and 3x DisplayPort 2.1, while the Pro 5300M is described as "Portable Device Dependent", reflecting its mobile-focused design.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The RX 7800 XT dominates the head-to-head results, winning eight of nine tests. The largest margin comes in PassMark GPU Compute, where the RX 7800 XT scores 13473 against 2658, a 406.9% advantage. This reflects the massive difference in compute throughput, with the newer card delivering over four times the raw compute performance.

PassMark G3D shows a 308.5% lead for the RX 7800 XT, scoring 24176 versus 5918. This is the most representative overall gaming performance metric in the set. DirectX 11 results are similarly lopsided: 249 versus 37, a 573% gap. DirectX 9 shows 304 against 80, a 280% difference. DirectX 10 records 121 versus 36, a 236.1% advantage. DirectX 12 results are closer in percentage terms but still decisive: 93 versus 25, a 272% lead.

The 2D performance gap is smaller but still clear: PassMark G2D shows 1177 versus 582, a 102.2% advantage for the RX 7800 XT. Vulkan performance heavily favors the RX 7800 XT, with 54228 versus 27912, a 94.3% difference. This is notable because both cards support Vulkan 1.4, yet the architectural improvements in RDNA 3.0 yield nearly double the score.

The one exception is Geekbench OpenCL, where the Pro 5300M scores 29252 versus 18290, a 37.5% lead for the older card. This anomaly suggests that OpenCL workloads may favor the Pro 5300M's driver optimizations or its 2:1 FP16 capability, though the RX 7800 XT's raw specs are far higher. The Pro 5300M also has a Geekbench Metal score of 33626, a test the RX 7800 XT does not have recorded, further indicating its optimization for Apple ecosystem workflows.

The Verdict

The data clearly favors the RX 7800 XT across nearly every metric. Its average benchmark score of 11627 exceeds the Pro 5300M's 10013 by roughly 16%, and it wins eight of nine head-to-head tests. The RX 7800 XT offers 16 GB of memory versus 4 GB, a 256-bit bus versus 128-bit, and nearly 12 times the FP32 compute (37.32 TFLOPS versus 3.200 TFLOPS). It also adds ray tracing cores, a feature entirely absent from the Pro 5300M.

However, the Pro 5300M is not without merit. Its 85 W TDP makes it far more suitable for portable devices, and its Geekbench OpenCL win, combined with a Metal score of 33626, suggests strong performance in Apple-centric compute environments. The Pro 5300M's production status is end-of-life, while the RX 7800 XT remains active.

For gaming and general compute, the RX 7800 XT is the obvious choice from the recorded data. Its DirectX 12 Ultimate support, higher bandwidth, and massive compute advantage make it a superior option for modern workloads. The Pro 5300M, however, may still serve niche mobile or legacy macOS use cases where its lower power draw and OpenCL/Metal performance matter more than raw rasterization.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every specification. The RX 7800 XT uses a 5 nm process, the Pro 5300M uses 7 nm. Transistors stand at 28,100 million versus 6,400 million. Die size is 346 mm² versus 158 mm². Transistor density is 81.2M per mm² versus 40.5M per mm². Base clocks are 1295 MHz versus 1000 MHz, boost clocks 2430 MHz versus 1250 MHz. The RX 7800 XT has a game clock of 2124 MHz; the Pro 5300M has none.

Memory differs entirely: 16 GB versus 4 GB GDDR6, 256-bit versus 128-bit bus, 624.1 GB/s versus 192.0 GB/s bandwidth. Memory clocks are 2438 MHz (19.5 Gbps effective) versus 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective). Shading units are 3840 versus 1280, TMUs 240 versus 80, ROPs 96 versus 32. The RX 7800 XT has 60 ray tracing cores; the Pro 5300M has none. Pixel rates are 233.3 GPixel/s versus 40.00 GPixel/s, texture rates 583.2 GTexel/s versus 100.0 GTexel/s. FP32 is 37.32 TFLOPS versus 3.200 TFLOPS. FP16 differs in ratio: 1:1 versus 2:1, with values of 37.32 TFLOPS and 6.400 TFLOPS respectively.

TDP is 263 W versus 85 W. The RX 7800 XT is dual-slot with 2x 8-pin power connectors and a 600 W suggested PSU; the Pro 5300M has no listed slot width, no power connectors, and no suggested PSU. Bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x16 versus PCIe 4.0 x8. Display outputs are 1x HDMI 2.1a and 3x DisplayPort 2.1 versus "Portable Device Dependent". DirectX support is 12 Ultimate (12_2) versus 12 (12_1). Dimensions: the RX 7800 XT measures 267 mm in length, 111 mm in height, and 50 mm in width; the Pro 5300M has no recorded dimensions. The RX 7800 XT launched at 499 USD, while the Pro 5300M has no launch MSRP listed.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 7800 XT wins in every DirectX test, all PassMark tests, and Vulkan. Its largest victories come in compute-heavy workloads: GPU Compute at 406.9% ahead, G3D at 308.5%, and DirectX 11 at 573%. This makes it the clear choice for gaming, 3D rendering, and modern API-based applications. Its 16 GB memory capacity and 624.1 GB/s bandwidth provide ample headroom for high-resolution textures and large datasets. The ray tracing cores add hardware acceleration for RT workloads, a feature the Pro 5300M cannot match.

The Pro 5300M wins only in Geekbench OpenCL, with a 37.5% advantage. Its additional Geekbench Metal score of 33626, which the RX 7800 XT lacks entirely, suggests it remains competitive in Apple's Metal API environment. The 85 W TDP makes it suitable for thin-and-light laptops, whereas the RX 7800 XT's 263 W TDP and dual-slot design require a desktop chassis with adequate cooling and a 600 W PSU. The Pro 5300M's end-of-life status means no future driver optimizations, but for legacy macOS systems or OpenCL-specific compute tasks, it still holds a measurable edge in that single benchmark.

For users prioritizing raw performance, modern API support, and future-proofing, the RX 7800 XT wins decisively. For those constrained by power budgets or locked into Apple's ecosystem, the Pro 5300M retains a niche but real advantage. The recorded data shows a generational leap, but also a reminder that benchmark results are workload-dependent: the Pro 5300M's OpenCL victory proves that even an older, weaker GPU can excel in specific environments.