AMD Radeon Pro 560 vs AMD Radeon R9 M380 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data in the database shows a clear, consistent advantage for the AMD Radeon Pro 560 across every recorded test. In the two benchmark applications where both GPUs have recorded scores, the Pro 560 wins outright, with the margin varying significantly depending on the workload.

In the Geekbench Metal test, the Radeon Pro 560 scores 20,918 points, while the Radeon R9 M380 scores 18,476 points. This represents a 13.2% advantage for the Pro 560, a solid lead that indicates a meaningful performance gap in graphics-heavy tasks. The Metal API is Apple's low-level graphics interface, so this result is particularly relevant for the Pro 560, which is listed under the "Radeon Pro Mac" generation. The 2,442-point gap in raw score is not trivial; it places the two cards in different performance tiers when normalized against the rest of the database.

The Geekbench OpenCL test shows an even larger divergence. The Pro 560 records 15,504 points, while the R9 M380 manages only 12,565 points. This yields a delta of 23.4% in favor of the Pro 560, a substantial difference of nearly three thousand points. OpenCL is a general-purpose compute API, and the Radeon Pro 560's superior showing suggests that its architecture handles parallel compute workloads more efficiently than the older R9 M380 design. This is not a marginal victory; the Pro 560 is clearly operating on a different level of compute performance.

It is worth remembering the R9 M380 has no recorded Geekbench Vulkan score in the database, while the Radeon Pro 560 has one at 16,232 points. This absence of data for the R9 M380 makes a direct head-to-head comparison in Vulkan impossible, but it does indicate that the Pro 560 has broader API support in the benchmark suite.

Looking at the broader context of the database, the Radeon Pro 560 holds an average benchmark score of 17,551 points, placing it at the 61st percentile of all GPUs. The Radeon R9 M380 averages 15,521 points, which puts it at the 58th percentile. The percentile difference of three points may seem small, but the average score gap of 2,030 points is considerable. The Pro 560's nearest rivals in the database include the AMD Radeon 780M (17,588 points, a 0.2% difference), the AMD Radeon Pro 460 (17,509 points, a 0.2% difference), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 (17,639 points, a 0.5% difference). This places the Pro 560 in the company of much more recent and capable hardware, despite its older release date. The R9 M380, by contrast, sits alongside the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti (15,548 points, a 0.2% difference) and the AMD Radeon Pro W5500 (15,679 points, a 1% difference), which reflects its lower standing in the performance hierarchy.

The data does not show a single test where the R9 M380 outperforms the Radeon Pro 560. The wins tally is 2-0 in favor of the Pro 560. This is a definitive result, though the magnitude of the win varies: a 13.2% margin in Metal and a 23.4% margin in OpenCL.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon Pro 560 establishes itself as the stronger candidate in every benchmark category recorded in the database. Its victory in the Geekbench Metal test, with a 13.2% lead, makes it the clear choice for graphics-intensive applications that leverage Apple's Metal API. This is significant because the Pro 560 belongs to the "Radeon Pro Mac" generation, suggesting it was designed with Mac ecosystems in mind, and the Metal benchmark result confirms that it delivers on that design goal.

For compute-oriented workloads, the Pro 560's advantage expands. The 23.4% lead in Geekbench OpenCL indicates that the card is substantially better suited for general-purpose GPU computing tasks, such as rendering, simulation, or data processing that offloads work to the GPU. The larger delta in OpenCL compared to Metal suggests that the architectural differences between the two cards have a more pronounced effect on compute tasks than on graphics rendering.

The Radeon R9 M380, on the other hand, does not have a single recorded win in the head-to-head benchmarks. Its strength, if any, would have to be inferred from its specifications rather than its performance results, since the database shows it trailing in both tests. The R9 M380's best showing is in Metal, where it comes within 13.2% of the Pro 560, a smaller gap than the 23.4% deficit in OpenCL. This suggests that the R9 M380 is relatively better suited to graphics tasks than to compute tasks, but it is still behind in both areas.

For a user or system builder choosing between these two parts, the decision is straightforward based on the data. The Pro 560 wins every benchmark, and its advantages are substantial. The only scenario where the R9 M380 might be preferable is if the specific workload relies on a feature or interface not measured by these benchmarks, but the recorded data provides no evidence for such a case. The Pro 560 is the superior performer across the board.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 560 has an average benchmark score of 17,551, while the AMD Radeon R9 M380 averages 15,521. This gives the Pro 560 a lead of 2,030 points.

Q: How much faster is the AMD Radeon Pro 560 in the Geekbench Metal test?

A: The Pro 560 scores 20,918 in Geekbench Metal, compared to 18,476 for the R9 M380. This is a 13.2% advantage for the Pro 560.

Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two cards in any benchmark?

A: The largest gap is in Geekbench OpenCL, where the Pro 560 scores 15,504 and the R9 M380 scores 12,565. This represents a 23.4% difference in favor of the Pro 560.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon R9 M380 beat the Pro 560 in any benchmark?

A: No. The recorded data shows the Pro 560 winning both head-to-head benchmark tests, with a wins tally of 2-0.

Q: How does the Radeon Pro 560 compare to the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 in the database?

A: The Pro 560 has an average score of 17,551, while the RTX 4060 has an average score of 17,639. The RTX 4060 is 0.5% ahead, making them very close performers in the database's rankings.

Q: What is the percentile ranking difference between the two cards?

A: The Radeon Pro 560 sits at the 61st percentile of all GPUs, while the Radeon R9 M380 sits at the 58th percentile.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every core specification recorded in the database. The Radeon Pro 560 is built with 1,024 shading units, 64 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 16 raster operation units (ROPs). The Radeon R9 M380 has fewer processing resources, with 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and also 16 ROPs. This means the Pro 560 has 256 more shading units and 16 more TMUs, which contributes to its higher compute throughput.

The memory subsystems are similar in capacity and type: both cards have 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus. However, the memory clock speeds differ. The Pro 560 runs its memory at 1270 MHz, translating to 5.1 Gbps effective, resulting in a bandwidth of 81.28 GB/s. The R9 M380 runs its memory at 1500 MHz, translating to 6 Gbps effective, which yields a higher bandwidth of 96.00 GB/s. This is one area where the R9 M380 has a specification advantage, yet it does not translate into a performance win in the benchmark data.

The clock speeds for the core also differ. The R9 M380 has a recorded base clock of 900 MHz and a boost clock of 1000 MHz. The Pro 560 has no recorded base or boost clock in the database, so a direct comparison of core clocks is not possible. However, the Pro 560's pixel rate is 14.51 GPixel/s and its texture rate is 58.05 GTexel/s, while the R9 M380 has a pixel rate of 16.00 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 48.00 GTexel/s. The R9 M380 has a higher pixel rate, but the Pro 560 has a higher texture rate.

The floating-point performance also differs. The Pro 560 delivers 1.858 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, and its FP16 performance is also 1.858 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio). The R9 M380 delivers 1.536 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, with no recorded FP16 figure. The Pro 560 therefore has a 0.322 TFLOPS advantage in FP32 compute.

The bus interface is another difference. The Pro 560 uses PCIe 3.0 x8, while the R9 M380 uses PCIe 3.0 x16. The Pro 560 has a slot width of "IGP" (integrated graphics processor) and no power connectors, while the R9 M380 has no recorded slot width or power connector data. The Pro 560's display outputs are listed as "Portable Device Dependent," while the R9 M380 has no recorded display output data.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is significant, spanning multiple generations of AMD's design. The Radeon Pro 560 is based on the "Polaris 21" chip and uses the GCN 4.0 architecture. The Radeon R9 M380 is based on the "Strato" chip and uses the older GCN 2.0 architecture. This generational difference is reflected in the manufacturing process: the Pro 560 is built on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries, while the R9 M380 uses a 28 nm process at TSMC. The smaller process node allows the Pro 560 to pack 3,000 million transistors into a die size of 123 mm², whereas the R9 M380 has 2,080 million transistors on a larger 160 mm² die. The transistor density figures illustrate this clearly: the Pro 560 achieves 24.4M transistors per mm², while the R9 M380 achieves only 13.0M per mm².

The Radeon Pro 560 belongs to the "Radeon Pro Mac" generation, specifically the 500 Series, and was released on 2017-04-17. The Radeon R9 M380 belongs to the "Gem System" generation, specifically the R9 M300 series, and was released earlier on 2015-05-04. The R9 M380 lists its predecessor as "Solar System" and its successor as "Polaris Mobile," while the Pro 560 has no recorded predecessor or successor in the database.

The API support also shows the Pro 560's newer architecture. Both cards support DirectX 12 (12_0) and OpenGL 4.6. However, the Pro 560 supports Vulkan 1.3, while the R9 M380 supports the older Vulkan 1.2.170 specification. This newer Vulkan support for the Pro 560 is consistent with its recorded Geekbench Vulkan score of 16,232, a test for which the R9 M380 has no recorded result.

Both cards are listed as end-of-life production status. The R9 M380 has a higher memory bandwidth of 96.00 GB/s compared to the Pro 560's 81.28 GB/s, a rare specification where the older card wins. However, the Pro 560 compensates with its superior transistor density, newer architecture, and higher compute throughput. The combination of a smaller process node, more shading units, and a more recent GCN iteration explains why the Pro 560 maintains a decisive lead in every benchmark test despite the R9 M380's memory bandwidth advantage.