AMD Radeon Pro 5300M vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the AMD Radeon Pro 5300M is the dominant performer in every recorded head-to-head test. In the two workloads where both GPUs have measured scores, the AMD part wins both, and the margins are enormous. The largest gap appears in Geekbench Metal, where the Radeon Pro 5300M scores 33,626 against the GeForce GTX 675MX's 6,131. That is a 448.5% advantage, a figure that places the two products in entirely different performance classes rather than adjacent tiers. The Geekbench OpenCL result is less extreme but still lopsided: 29,252 for the Radeon Pro 5300M versus 10,723 for the GeForce GTX 675MX, a 172.8% lead.

The overall average benchmark scores reinforce this hierarchy. The Radeon Pro 5300M carries an average score of 10,013 across all recorded tests, while the GeForce GTX 675MX averages 8,427. That difference of roughly 18.8% in the average is smaller than the head-to-head deltas, which is expected because the average includes tests that only one of the two GPUs participated in. The Radeon Pro 5300M also sits higher in the global percentile ranking, at the 48th percentile of all GPUs, versus the 43rd percentile for the GeForce GTX 675MX.

Context from the nearest rivals helps calibrate these numbers. The Radeon Pro 5300M's average score of 10,013 places it within a tight cluster: the NVIDIA Quadro K5100M averages 10,043 (0.3% higher), the AMD Radeon R9 M375 averages 10,070 (0.6% higher), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 870M averages 9,959 (0.5% lower). The NVIDIA Quadro 6000 trails at 9,846, which is a 1.7% deficit. In other words, the Radeon Pro 5300M is effectively level with a group of mid-range mobile and workstation parts from several generations, not a class leader but far from an outlier. The GeForce GTX 675MX, by contrast, lands in a weaker neighborhood: the AMD Radeon 880M averages 8,436 (0.1% higher), the NVIDIA GeForce MX330 averages 8,458 (0.4% higher), and the AMD Radeon HD 8870M averages 8,462 (0.4% higher). Only the AMD Radeon R9 M375X sits below it, at 8,325, a 1.2% deficit. The GTX 675MX is therefore bracketed by entry-level and older mid-range parts, while the Radeon Pro 5300M is bracketed by substantially stronger hardware.

Where Each One Wins

The Radeon Pro 5300M wins everywhere that data exists. In Geekbench Metal, the AMD part's 33,626 score is not merely a win, it is a 448.5% blowout. Metal is Apple's graphics API, and the Radeon Pro 5300M's generation was built for Mac systems, so a strong showing there is consistent with its design intent. The GeForce GTX 675MX, a product from 2012, predates Metal's widespread adoption and its 6,131 score reflects that age. For users running Metal-based applications, the choice is clear and supported by a massive margin.

The Geekbench OpenCL result tells the same story with a smaller gap. The Radeon Pro 5300M scores 29,252, beating the GeForce GTX 675MX's 10,723 by 172.8%. OpenCL is a cross-platform compute standard, and this result indicates that the AMD part's advantage extends beyond Apple-specific APIs into general GPU compute workloads. The GeForce GTX 675MX has no recorded wins in any shared test, so there is no workload in the database where it outperforms the Radeon Pro 5300M.

For workloads not covered by the head-to-head tests, the broader benchmark record offers context. The Radeon Pro 5300M has results across PassMark DirectX 9, 10, 11, and 12 tests, plus G2D, G3D, and GPU compute tests. Its strongest PassMark result is in DirectX 9 (80), with DirectX 10 (36) and DirectX 11 (37) close together, and DirectX 12 lower at 25. The GeForce GTX 675MX has no recorded PassMark results in the database, so no direct comparison is possible there. The Radeon Pro 5300M also has a Geekbench Vulkan score of 27,912, a test the GTX 675MX did not run. The practical takeaway is that the Radeon Pro 5300M is the only one of the two with a documented footprint across modern graphics APIs, while the GeForce GTX 675MX's recorded data is limited to Metal and OpenCL.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different manufacturing eras and different design philosophies. The AMD Radeon Pro 5300M uses the Navi 14 chip built on RDNA 1.0 architecture, fabricated on TSMC's 7 nm process. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX uses the GK104 chip on Kepler architecture, fabricated on TSMC's 28 nm process. The process node gap is stark: 7 nm versus 28 nm, which explains much of the efficiency and density difference. The Radeon Pro 5300M packs 6,400 million transistors into a 158 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 40.5 million per mm². The GeForce GTX 675MX contains 3,540 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, for a density of 12.0 million per mm². The AMD part is smaller in physical area yet holds nearly twice as many transistors.

The memory subsystems are also from different generations. The Radeon Pro 5300M uses 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, with memory clocked at 1500 MHz and 12 Gbps effective, delivering 192.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The GeForce GTX 675MX uses 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, with memory at 900 MHz and 3.6 Gbps effective, for 115.2 GB/s. The AMD part has twice the capacity and 66.7% more bandwidth despite a narrower bus, a direct benefit of newer memory technology. The wider 256-bit bus on the NVIDIA part cannot compensate for the older GDDR5 standard.

Compute resources follow a similar pattern. The Radeon Pro 5300M has 1,280 shading units, 80 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The GeForce GTX 675MX has 960 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The AMD part has one-third more shading units, while the TMU and ROP counts are identical. The resulting throughput numbers show a large gap: the Radeon Pro 5300M achieves 40.00 GPixel/s pixel rate and 100.0 GTexel/s texture rate, versus 13.08 GPixel/s and 52.32 GTexel/s for the GeForce GTX 675MX. The AMD part is roughly three times faster in pixel throughput and nearly twice as fast in texture throughput. In FP32 compute, the Radeon Pro 5300M delivers 3.200 TFLOPS against the GeForce GTX 675MX's 1,255.7 GFLOPS, a factor of about 2.5. The AMD part also lists FP16 performance of 6.400 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio), while the NVIDIA part has no recorded FP16 capability.

Power and interface details also differ. The Radeon Pro 5300M is rated at 85 W TDP, while the GeForce GTX 675MX is rated at 100 W. The AMD part achieves substantially higher performance at 15 W lower power. The Radeon Pro 5300M uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface, while the GeForce GTX 675MX uses an MXM-B (3.0) connector. Both are marked as having no power connectors and both have display outputs listed as "Portable Device Dependent." The Radeon Pro 5300M supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The GeForce GTX 675MX supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175. The API support difference is small but real, with the AMD part supporting a higher DirectX feature level and a newer Vulkan version.

The production timeline is also informative. The GeForce GTX 675MX was released on 2012-09-30 and belongs to the GeForce 600M generation, with a predecessor in the GeForce 500M series and a successor in the GeForce 700M series. The Radeon Pro 5300M was released on 2019-11-12 and belongs to the Radeon Pro Mac (Navi Mobile) generation. Both are now end-of-life products.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 5300M has an average benchmark score of 10,013, compared to 8,427 for the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX.

Q: How large is the performance gap in Geekbench Metal?

A: The Radeon Pro 5300M scores 33,626 in Geekbench Metal, which is 448.5% higher than the GeForce GTX 675MX's score of 6,131.

Q: Does the GeForce GTX 675MX win any head-to-head benchmark?

A: No. In the two recorded head-to-head tests, Geekbench Metal and Geekbench OpenCL, the GeForce GTX 675MX loses both.

Q: What are the memory specifications of each GPU?

A: The Radeon Pro 5300M has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 192.0 GB/s bandwidth. The GeForce GTX 675MX has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 115.2 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: How do the transistor counts compare?

A: The Radeon Pro 5300M contains 6,400 million transistors on a 158 mm² die, while the GeForce GTX 675MX contains 3,540 million transistors on a 294 mm² die.

Q: Which GPU has better API support?

A: The Radeon Pro 5300M supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The GeForce GTX 675MX supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every major specification category. The process node is 7 nm for the AMD part versus 28 nm for the NVIDIA part. Transistor count is 6,400 million versus 3,540 million, and die size is 158 mm² versus 294 mm², giving transistor densities of 40.5M per mm² and 12.0M per mm² respectively. The Radeon Pro 5300M has a base clock of 1000 MHz and a boost clock of 1250 MHz; the GeForce GTX 675MX has no recorded base or boost clock. Memory clock is 1500 MHz with 12 Gbps effective for the AMD part, versus 900 MHz with 3.6 Gbps effective for the NVIDIA part. Memory size is 4 GB versus 2 GB, memory type is GDDR6 versus GDDR5, bus width is 128 bit versus 256 bit, and bandwidth is 192.0 GB/s versus 115.2 GB/s. Shading units are 1,280 versus 960, while TMUs are 80 for both and ROPs are 32 for both. Pixel rate is 40.00 GPixel/s versus 13.08 GPixel/s, texture rate is 100.0 GTexel/s versus 52.32 GTexel/s, and FP32 compute is 3.200 TFLOPS versus 1,255.7 GFLOPS. The AMD part has FP16 performance of 6.400 TFLOPS (2:1); the NVIDIA part has no recorded FP16. TDP is 85 W versus 100 W. The bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x8 versus MXM-B (3.0). The AMD part supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4; the NVIDIA part supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.2.175. Release dates are 2019-11-12 versus 2012-09-30. The GeForce GTX 675MX has a predecessor (GeForce 500M) and successor (GeForce 700M); the Radeon Pro 5300M has neither recorded.

The Verdict

The data points to a single conclusion: the AMD Radeon Pro 5300M is the superior GPU in every measured category. Its head-to-head wins are decisive, with a 448.5% lead in Geekbench Metal and a 172.8% lead in Geekbench OpenCL. Its average benchmark score is 18.8% higher. Its architecture is newer, its process node is smaller, its memory is faster and larger, and its compute throughput is roughly 2.5 times higher in FP32. It even consumes 15 W less power than the GeForce GTX 675MX, at 85 W versus 100 W.

The GeForce GTX 675MX has no recorded advantage in any shared test. Its only distinguishing features are a wider memory bus (256 bit versus 128 bit) and a higher ROP count parity, but those do not translate into competitive performance. Its nearest rivals in the database are entry-level and older mobile parts, while the Radeon Pro 5300M sits alongside workstation-class GPUs like the NVIDIA Quadro K5100M.

For a buyer choosing between these two, the decision rests entirely on the Radeon Pro 5300M. It is the faster card in compute and graphics workloads, the more efficient card per watt, and the one with broader API support. The GeForce GTX 675MX is a product from an older generation with a smaller benchmark footprint and no competitive results. The database shows no scenario where the NVIDIA part is the better pick.