AMD Radeon Pro 560 vs AMD Radeon Pro 560X Comparison

The AMD Radeon Pro 560 and the AMD Radeon Pro 560X are both integrated graphics solutions built for Apple’s Mac lineup, sharing the same Polaris 21 chip and GCN 4.0 architecture. Despite their similar names and specifications, benchmark data reveals that the older Radeon Pro 560 holds a significant advantage in overall performance, while the Radeon Pro 560X counters in one specific workload. This analysis walks through the recorded measurements, architectural details, and practical implications for each part.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results show a clear split in workload-specific performance. In the Geekbench Metal test, the AMD Radeon Pro 560 scores 20,918 points, while the AMD Radeon Pro 560X scores 18,763 points. That is an 11.5% lead for the Pro 560, a substantial margin in a graphics API heavily used by macOS applications. The Pro 560’s Metal advantage suggests that Apple-ecosystem software leveraging this API will run noticeably better on the older card.

The gap widens dramatically in the Geekbench OpenCL test. The Pro 560 records 15,504 points, whereas the Pro 560X manages only 9,663 points. This represents a 60.4% difference, making it the largest single victory in the entire comparison. OpenCL workloads, which include compute-heavy tasks like video rendering, scientific simulations, and certain image processing filters, clearly favor the Pro 560 by a huge margin. The data does not explain why the 560X underperforms so severely in OpenCL relative to Metal, but the recorded numbers are unmistakable.

The only test where the Pro 560X wins is Geekbench Vulkan. Here, the 560X scores 16,819 points against the Pro 560’s 16,232 points, a 3.5% advantage. Vulkan is less common in macOS environments compared to Metal, but for cross-platform applications or games that use this API, the 560X offers a modest improvement. The delta is far smaller than the Pro 560’s wins, however, and it does not offset the losses elsewhere.

Looking at average benchmark scores across all three tests, the Pro 560 posts an average of 17,551 points, while the Pro 560X averages 15,082 points. That is a 2,469-point gap in favor of the Pro 560, representing roughly a 16% overall performance advantage. The Pro 560 also sits at the 61st percentile among all GPUs in the database, compared to the 57th percentile for the Pro 560X. The Pro 560’s nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon 780M (average score 17,588, a 0.2% difference) and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 (average score 17,639, a 0.5% difference), placing it in company with much newer integrated and discrete parts. The Pro 560X, by contrast, sits near the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 Ti (average score 15,063, a 0.1% difference) and the AMD Radeon RX 7600 (average score 15,171, a 0.6% difference), a significantly lower performance tier.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 560 has an average benchmark score of 17,551 points, while the AMD Radeon Pro 560X averages 15,082 points. The Pro 560 leads by roughly 16% in this aggregate metric.

Q: In which benchmark does the Radeon Pro 560X outperform the Radeon Pro 560?

A: The Pro 560X wins only the Geekbench Vulkan test, scoring 16,819 points versus 16,232 points for the Pro 560, a 3.5% advantage. The Pro 560 wins both the Metal and OpenCL tests.

Q: How large is the OpenCL performance difference between the two cards?

A: The Pro 560 achieves 15,504 points in Geekbench OpenCL, compared to 9,663 points for the Pro 560X. This is a 60.4% lead for the Pro 560, the largest margin in any recorded benchmark.

Q: What are the nearest rivals to each card based on average score?

A: The Pro 560’s closest competitor is the AMD Radeon 780M with an average score of 17,588 points (a 0.2% difference). The Pro 560X’s closest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 Ti with an average score of 15,063 points (a 0.1% difference).

Q: Do both cards share the same graphics chip and architecture?

A: Yes, both use the Polaris 21 chip built on GCN 4.0 architecture. They are fabricated on the same 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries, with identical transistor counts and die sizes.

Q: What is the percentile ranking for each GPU?

A: The Pro 560 ranks in the 61st percentile among all GPUs in the database, while the Pro 560X ranks in the 57th percentile. This reflects the Pro 560’s higher overall standing.

Architecture Differences

Both cards are built on the same fundamental silicon: the Polaris 21 chip using GCN 4.0 architecture, manufactured on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The transistor count is identical at 3,000 million, and the die size is the same at 123 mm², yielding a transistor density of 24.4 million per square millimeter. There are no differences in the core configuration: each GPU has 1,024 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 16 raster operation pipelines. Neither card supports ray tracing or tensor cores, and both are limited to a 128-bit memory bus.

The architectural differences are subtle and appear primarily in clock speeds and derived performance rates. The memory clock differs: the Pro 560 runs its GDDR5 memory at 1270 MHz, which translates to 5.1 Gbps effective, while the Pro 560X runs at 1470 MHz, or 5.9 Gbps effective. This higher memory clock gives the 560X a memory bandwidth of 94.08 GB/s, compared to 81.28 GB/s for the 560, a 15.7% increase. The pixel rate and texture rate also differ: the Pro 560 delivers 14.51 GPixel/s and 58.05 GTexel/s, while the Pro 560X delivers 16.06 GPixel/s and 64.26 GTexel/s. These are direct consequences of the higher memory clock and possibly other internal timing differences, though the database does not list a base or boost clock for either GPU.

Both cards share the same API support: DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. They also have identical power characteristics, with a 75 W TDP, no power connectors, and an IGP slot width. The bus interface is PCIe 3.0 x8 for both, and display outputs are listed as portable device dependent, meaning the exact ports depend on the host laptop. The FP32 and FP16 compute rates are identical to each other within each card (1:1 ratio), but the raw numbers differ: the Pro 560 computes 1.858 TFLOPS, while the Pro 560X computes 2.056 TFLOPS. This 10.7% higher theoretical compute rate does not translate into benchmark victories, as the actual performance measurements show the opposite outcome.

The production status for both is end-of-life. The Pro 560 was released on April 17, 2017, while the Pro 560X followed on July 15, 2018. Neither card has a listed predecessor or successor, and neither has a recorded launch MSRP.

Specification Differences

The specification tables reveal only a handful of differences between the two GPUs. The most direct comparison is in memory clocks: the Pro 560 uses 1270 MHz (5.1 Gbps effective), while the Pro 560X uses 1470 MHz (5.9 Gbps effective). This leads to a bandwidth difference, with the 560X offering 94.08 GB/s versus 81.28 GB/s for the 560. The pixel rate differs as well: 14.51 GPixel/s for the 560 and 16.06 GPixel/s for the 560X. The texture rate follows suit, with the 560 at 58.05 GTexel/s and the 560X at 64.26 GTexel/s. The FP32 and FP16 throughput also differ, with the 560X rated at 2.056 TFLOPS and the 560 at 1.858 TFLOPS. These are the only specification-level differences; everything else, including memory size (4 GB GDDR5), bus width (128 bit), shading units (1024), TMUs (64), ROPs (16), TDP (75 W), slot width (IGP), power connectors (none), and bus interface (PCIe 3.0 x8), is identical.

The release dates also differ, with the Pro 560 launching in April 2017 and the Pro 560X in July 2018. The generation labels differ too: the Pro 560 belongs to the “Radeon Pro Mac (500 Series)” generation, while the Pro 560X belongs to the “Radeon Pro Mac (500X Series)” generation. These naming distinctions are cosmetic, however, as the underlying chip is the same Polaris 21.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon Pro 560 wins in two of the three recorded benchmarks, and its victories are substantial. In Geekbench Metal, it leads by 11.5%, and in Geekbench OpenCL, it leads by 60.4%. This makes the Pro 560 the clear choice for any workload that relies on Metal or OpenCL, which covers the vast majority of macOS graphics and compute applications. Video editing, 3D rendering, photo processing, and general GPU-accelerated tasks in Apple’s ecosystem will all run faster on the Pro 560. The average benchmark score of 17,551 points places it in the 61st percentile, a respectable position that puts it within a fraction of a percent of the AMD Radeon 780M and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060.

The AMD Radeon Pro 560X wins only in Geekbench Vulkan, with a 3.5% margin. Vulkan is used primarily in cross-platform games and some professional applications, so this advantage is narrow and specialized. The 560X also has higher theoretical specifications: more memory bandwidth (94.08 GB/s), higher pixel rate (16.06 GPixel/s), higher texture rate (64.26 GTexel/s), and higher FP32 throughput (2.056 TFLOPS). If a workload is purely bandwidth-bound or compute-bound in a way that Vulkan exposes, the 560X could edge ahead, but the recorded benchmarks do not show such a scenario outside of Vulkan. The 560X’s average score of 15,082 points puts it in the 57th percentile, and its nearest rival is the much older NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 Ti.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the recorded data, the AMD Radeon Pro 560 is the stronger GPU for most users. It wins the Metal and OpenCL benchmarks by wide margins, including a dominant 60.4% OpenCL lead, and it holds a higher average benchmark score (17,551 versus 15,082). Its 61st percentile ranking versus the 57th percentile for the 560X reinforces this assessment. For anyone using macOS applications that rely on Metal, which is the standard for modern Apple graphics, the Pro 560 delivers 11.5% better performance. For compute-heavy tasks using OpenCL, the Pro 560 is in a completely different class.

The AMD Radeon Pro 560X is only preferable in a narrow scenario: if the primary workload is Vulkan-based, the 3.5% advantage over the Pro 560 might matter. The 560X also offers higher memory bandwidth and theoretical compute rates, but these do not translate into wins in the majority of benchmarks. The data suggests that the 560X’s higher clock speeds do not compensate for whatever inefficiencies exist in its implementation, particularly in OpenCL where it loses by over 60%. Users who prioritize Vulkan performance or who need the slightly higher pixel and texture rates for specific rendering tasks might consider the 560X, but for general graphics and compute in a Mac environment, the Radeon Pro 560 is the better choice. The verdict is straightforward: the Pro 560 wins 2 out of 3 benchmarks, wins the aggregate score, and ranks higher in the database, making it the recommended part for most scenarios.