AMD Radeon Pro 5300M vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN BLACK Comparison

The AMD Radeon Pro 5300M and NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN BLACK represent two very different design philosophies separated by five years of GPU evolution. The data reveals a clear split: the AMD card dominates modern compute APIs while the NVIDIA card crushes legacy DirectX workloads. Their average benchmark scores sit close — 10013 for the Radeon Pro 5300M versus 9474 for the GTX TITAN BLACK — yet the individual test results tell a story of divergent strengths that make each card preferable in distinct scenarios.

Where Each One Wins

The Radeon Pro 5300M claims victory in exactly two of the ten head-to-head tests, but both are significant. Its Geekbench Metal score of 33626 versus 24172 for the GTX TITAN BLACK represents a 39.1% advantage, the largest margin of any benchmark in this comparison. This is a clear signal that the AMD card is optimized for Apple's Metal API, which makes sense given its "Radeon Pro Mac (Navi Mobile)" generation designation. The Radeon Pro 5300M also wins Geekbench OpenCL with 29252 against 27218, a more modest 7.5% lead.

The GTX TITAN BLACK wins the remaining eight tests, but its victories cluster heavily in legacy DirectX workloads. The most dramatic difference appears in Passmark DirectX 11, where the NVIDIA card scores 73 versus just 37 for the AMD card — a 49.3% deficit for the Radeon Pro 5300M. Similar patterns emerge in DirectX 9 (133 versus 80, a 39.8% gap) and DirectX 10 (47 versus 36, a 23.4% gap). The GTX TITAN BLACK also wins Passmark G3D with 9184 versus 5918, a 35.6% margin, and Passmark GPU Compute with 3726 versus 2658, a 28.7% lead.

The use-case split is stark: the Radeon Pro 5300M is built for modern, cross-platform compute environments, while the GTX TITAN BLACK excels in older DirectX-based applications. For users running Metal-centric workflows or OpenCL compute tasks, the AMD card is clearly superior. For anyone dealing with DirectX 9, 10, or 11 titles or applications, the NVIDIA card offers substantially better performance.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is enormous. The Radeon Pro 5300M uses the Navi 14 chip built on RDNA 1.0 architecture, fabricated on TSMC's 7 nm process. The GTX TITAN BLACK uses the GK110B chip with Kepler architecture on a 28 nm process from the same foundry. This process difference alone explains much of the efficiency gap: the AMD chip packs 6,400 million transistors into 158 mm² (40.5M transistors per mm²), while the NVIDIA chip spreads 7,080 million transistors across 561 mm² (12.6M per mm²).

The transistor count is actually higher on the NVIDIA chip, but the Radeon Pro 5300M achieves a 3.2x higher transistor density. This density advantage translates directly into power efficiency: the AMD card draws 85 W while the GTX TITAN BLACK consumes 250 W — nearly three times as much power for roughly comparable average performance.

Memory configurations differ fundamentally as well. The Radeon Pro 5300M uses 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 192.0 GB/s bandwidth. The GTX TITAN BLACK offers 6 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus with 336.0 GB/s bandwidth. The NVIDIA card provides 50% more memory capacity and 75% more bandwidth, which helps explain its dominance in memory-intensive legacy workloads.

Compute resources also favor the NVIDIA card numerically: 2880 shading units versus 1280, 240 TMUs versus 80, and 48 ROPs versus 32. The GTX TITAN BLACK's peak FP32 throughput of 5.645 TFLOPS nearly doubles the Radeon Pro 5300M's 3.200 TFLOPS. Yet the AMD card counters with FP16 support at 6.400 TFLOPS, a capability the NVIDIA card lacks entirely.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Geekbench Metal result is the single most decisive data point in this comparison. The Radeon Pro 5300M's 33626 score versus 24172 for the GTX TITAN BLACK represents a 39.1% advantage — the largest delta in either direction across all ten tests. This suggests the RDNA architecture's compute-oriented design delivers outsized benefits in Metal workloads, likely due to better scheduling and memory access patterns for that API.

Geekbench OpenCL shows a tighter race: 29252 for the AMD card versus 27218 for the NVIDIA card, a 7.5% margin. This is the only other test the Radeon Pro 5300M wins, and the smaller delta suggests OpenCL performance is more evenly matched between the two architectures.

The GTX TITAN BLACK's biggest win comes in Passmark DirectX 11, where its 73 score crushes the Radeon Pro 5300M's 37 — a 49.3% deficit for the AMD card. This pattern repeats across the DirectX family: DirectX 9 shows a 39.8% gap (133 versus 80), DirectX 12 shows a 26.5% gap (34 versus 25), and DirectX 10 shows a 23.4% gap (47 versus 36). The consistency of these margins suggests the Kepler architecture's mature DirectX driver stack and higher raw shader throughput dominate in these API environments.

Passmark G3D reinforces the NVIDIA card's overall graphics advantage: 9184 versus 5918, a 35.6% lead. Passmark GPU Compute also favors the GTX TITAN BLACK at 3726 versus 2658, a 28.7% margin. Even the 2D test, Passmark G2D, narrowly goes to NVIDIA at 595 versus 582, a 2.2% difference.

The Verdict

The benchmark data supports a clear conclusion: choose the AMD Radeon Pro 5300M for modern compute APIs, particularly Metal and OpenCL workloads where it leads by 39.1% and 7.5% respectively. Its 85 W power draw and 7 nm process make it dramatically more efficient than the GTX TITAN BLACK's 250 W requirement. The Radeon Pro 5300M also holds a slight edge in average benchmark score at 10013 versus 9474, and sits at the 48th percentile versus the NVIDIA card's 46th.

Choose the NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN BLACK for legacy DirectX applications. Its wins in DirectX 9, 10, 11, and 12 are substantial, with margins ranging from 23.4% to 49.3%. The GTX TITAN BLACK also offers more memory (6 GB versus 4 GB), higher bandwidth (336.0 GB/s versus 192.0 GB/s), and nearly double the FP32 throughput (5.645 TFLOPS versus 3.200 TFLOPS). Its Passmark G3D score of 9184 versus 5918 indicates superior raw graphical performance in traditional rendering pipelines.

The GTX TITAN BLACK's launch MSRP was 999 USD. The Radeon Pro 5300M's average benchmark score of 10013 places it among rivals like the NVIDIA Quadro K5100M (10043, -0.3%) and AMD Radeon R9 M375 (10070, -0.6%), while the GTX TITAN BLACK's 9474 average aligns it with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760 (9458, 0.2%) and AMD Radeon R7 M380 (9313, 1.7%).

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins more head-to-head benchmarks?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN BLACK wins 8 of 10 tests, while the AMD Radeon Pro 5300M wins 2.

Q: What is the largest performance gap in either direction?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 5300M leads by 39.1% in Geekbench Metal (33626 versus 24172), and the GTX TITAN BLACK leads by 49.3% in Passmark DirectX 11 (73 versus 37).

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Radeon Pro 5300M averages 10013 across all tests, while the GTX TITAN BLACK averages 9474 — a difference of 539 points in favor of the AMD card.

Q: Which GPU has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The GTX TITAN BLACK offers 336.0 GB/s bandwidth versus 192.0 GB/s for the Radeon Pro 5300M, a 75% advantage for the NVIDIA card.

Q: Do either of these GPUs support DirectX 12?

A: Both support DirectX 12, but with different feature levels: the Radeon Pro 5300M supports 12 (12_1) while the GTX TITAN BLACK supports 12 (11_1).

Q: What are the power consumption figures for each card?

A: The Radeon Pro 5300M draws 85 W, while the GTX TITAN BLACK draws 250 W — the NVIDIA card consumes nearly three times as much power.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon Pro 5300M | NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN BLACK |

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

| Architecture | RDNA 1.0 | Kepler |

| Process Node | 7 nm | 28 nm |

| Transistors | 6,400 million | 7,080 million |

| Die Size | 158 mm² | 561 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 40.5M / mm² | 12.6M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1000 MHz | 889 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1250 MHz | 980 MHz |

| Memory Size | 4 GB | 6 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 384 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 192.0 GB/s | 336.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 1280 | 2880 |

| TMUs | 80 | 240 |

| ROPs | 32 | 48 |

| Pixel Rate | 40.00 GPixel/s | 58.80 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 100.0 GTexel/s | 235.2 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 3.200 TFLOPS | 5.645 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 6.400 TFLOPS (2:1) | None |

| TDP | 85 W | 250 W |

| Power Connectors | None | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | None | 600 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |

| DirectX Support | 12 (12_1) | 12 (11_1) |

| Vulkan Support | 1.4 | 1.2.175 |

| Release Date | 2019-11-12 | 2014-02-17 |

| Launch MSRP | None | 999 USD |

| Slot Width | None | Dual-slot |

| Dimensions | None | 267 mm x 111 mm x 38 mm |