AMD Radeon Pro 560 vs AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive sweep for the AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT across all three shared benchmark tests. In Geekbench Metal, the RX 5500 XT scores 54,842 against the Radeon Pro 560’s 20,918, a lead of 61.9%. That is not a marginal gap; it is a generational leap in raw compute throughput.

Geekbench OpenCL tells the same story. The RX 5500 XT posts 46,965, while the Pro 560 manages 15,504. The delta here is 67%, the largest margin in the head-to-head set. For compute workloads that rely on OpenCL, the RX 5500 XT is effectively in another class.

Vulkan results narrow the gap slightly but still favor the RX 5500 XT decisively. The newer card scores 44,191 versus 16,232, a 63.3% advantage. Across all three tests, the RX 5500 XT wins 3 out of 3. The Pro 560 does not record a single victory in the shared benchmark suite.

Context from the database’s nearest-rival comparisons reinforces how each card sits in the broader market. The Pro 560’s average benchmark score is 17,551, placing it at the 61st percentile of all GPUs. Its closest rival, the AMD Radeon 780M, averages 17,588, a difference of just 0.2%. The Pro 560 is essentially tied with that integrated GPU, and it sits within 0.5% of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060’s average score of 17,639. That is a tight cluster, meaning the Pro 560 performs at a level comparable to modern mid-range hardware, despite its age.

The RX 5500 XT, by contrast, has an average benchmark score of 14,692, which is lower than the Pro 560’s average. That seems counterintuitive given its head-to-head dominance. The explanation is in the benchmark mix. The RX 5500 XT includes a broader set of tests, including Passmark entries where its scores are modest. Its percentile rank is 57, below the Pro 560’s 61. The nearest rivals for the RX 5500 XT include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770 (14,747, 0.4% ahead) and the AMD Radeon RX Vega 11 (14,385, 2.1% behind). The averages place the RX 5500 XT in a lower overall tier, but the Geekbench results show where its real strengths lie.

FAQ

Q: Which card wins in Geekbench Metal?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT wins with a score of 54,842, a 61.9% lead over the Radeon Pro 560’s 20,918.

Q: Is the Radeon Pro 560 competitive with modern GPUs?

A: Its average benchmark score of 17,551 is within 0.2% of the AMD Radeon 780M (17,588) and within 0.5% of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 (17,639), putting it in the 61st percentile of all GPUs.

Q: What is the biggest performance gap between the two cards?

A: The largest delta is in Geekbench OpenCL, where the RX 5500 XT leads by 67%, scoring 46,965 versus 15,504.

Q: How does the RX 5500 XT compare to its own nearest rivals?

A: The RX 5500 XT’s average score of 14,692 trails the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770 (14,747) by 0.4% and sits 2.0% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M (14,404).

Q: Does the Radeon Pro 560 win any benchmark in the head-to-head set?

A: No. The RX 5500 XT wins all three shared tests: Geekbench Metal, OpenCL, and Vulkan.

Q: Which card has the higher percentile ranking?

A: The Radeon Pro 560 ranks at the 61st percentile of all GPUs, while the RX 5500 XT ranks at the 57th percentile.

Where Each One Wins

The Radeon Pro 560 wins in overall market positioning. Its average benchmark score of 17,551 is higher than the RX 5500 XT’s 14,692, and its 61st percentile ranking beats the RX 5500 XT’s 57th. In the database’s nearest-rival analysis, the Pro 560 is bracketed by the AMD Radeon 780M and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060, both of which are far more recent designs. That suggests the Pro 560, despite being end-of-life, holds its own in aggregated performance metrics across a wide range of tests.

The RX 5500 XT wins in every compute-oriented scenario measured by the shared benchmarks. Metal, OpenCL, and Vulkan all favor the RX 5500 XT by margins between 61.9% and 67%. If the workload is GPU compute, the RX 5500 XT is the clear choice. The data shows no scenario where the Pro 560 outperforms the RX 5500 XT in those three APIs.

For gaming, the RX 5500 XT’s higher pixel rate and texture rate, combined with its larger shading unit count, point to an advantage, though the database does not include a direct gaming benchmark in the head-to-head set. The Pro 560’s strength lies in its efficiency profile. It is an integrated form factor with no power connectors and a 75 W TDP, which makes it suitable for compact systems where the RX 5500 XT’s dual-slot, 130 W design with a single 8-pin connector would not fit or be feasible.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ substantially in almost every measurable specification. The Radeon Pro 560 uses 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, yielding 81.28 GB/s of bandwidth. The RX 5500 XT also has 4 GB, but it uses GDDR6 on the same 128-bit bus, delivering 224.0 GB/s. That is a 2.75x increase in memory bandwidth, which directly impacts texture-heavy and compute workloads.

Clock speeds differ as well. The Pro 560 lists no base or boost clock in the database, but its memory clock is 1270 MHz (5.1 Gbps effective). The RX 5500 XT has a base clock of 1607 MHz, a game clock of 1717 MHz, and a boost clock of 1845 MHz, with memory at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective). The RX 5500 XT’s shading units number 1,408 versus 1,024 for the Pro 560. Texture mapping units are 88 versus 64, and ROPs are 32 versus 16.

Pixel rate and texture rate follow the same pattern. The RX 5500 XT achieves 59.04 GPixel/s and 162.4 GTexel/s, while the Pro 560 manages 14.51 GPixel/s and 58.05 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 5.196 TFLOPS for the RX 5500 XT versus 1.858 TFLOPS for the Pro 560. FP16 performance differs even more: the RX 5500 XT delivers 10.39 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio, while the Pro 560 is capped at 1.858 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio.

Power and physical specs diverge sharply. The Pro 560 is an IGP slot width, draws 75 W, and requires no power connectors. The RX 5500 XT is dual-slot, draws 130 W, requires a single 8-pin connector, and suggests a 300 W power supply. The RX 5500 XT is 180 mm (7.1 inches) long. The Pro 560 lists no dimensions, as it is designed for portable devices with output dependent on the host system. Bus interfaces also differ: PCIe 3.0 x8 for the Pro 560, PCIe 4.0 x8 for the RX 5500 XT.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two cards reflects a major generational shift at AMD. The Radeon Pro 560 is built on the Polaris 21 chip using GCN 4.0 architecture, fabricated on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It uses 3,000 million transistors on a 123 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 24.4 million per mm². The RX 5500 XT uses the Navi 14 chip with RDNA 1.0 architecture, built on a 7 nm process at TSMC. That die packs 6,400 million transistors into 158 mm², achieving a density of 40.5 million per mm².

The process node difference is the foundation of the performance gap. Moving from 14 nm to 7 nm allows the RX 5500 XT to nearly double transistor density while increasing die size by only 35 mm². The GCN 4.0 architecture in the Pro 560 was designed for compute efficiency in professional workloads, but it lacks the throughput scaling of RDNA 1.0. The RX 5500 XT’s RDNA 1.0 architecture introduces a 2:1 FP16 execution rate, which the GCN 4.0 part does not offer.

DirectX support differs as well. The Pro 560 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), while the RX 5500 XT supports DirectX 12 (12_1), adding features like conservative rasterization and rasterizer ordered views. Vulkan support is newer on the RX 5500 XT at version 1.4 versus 1.3 on the Pro 560. OpenGL is identical at 4.6. The RX 5500 XT’s PCIe 4.0 x8 interface doubles the bandwidth available to the Pro 560’s PCIe 3.0 x8, which matters for data transfer in compute tasks.

The Radeon Pro 560 belongs to the Radeon Pro Mac (500 Series) generation, released in April 2017. The RX 5500 XT belongs to the Navi (RX 5000) generation, released in December 2019. The RX 5500 XT’s predecessor is listed as Vega, and its successor is Navi II. The Pro 560 has no listed predecessor or successor, reflecting its status as a niche mobile professional card.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: for raw performance in Metal, OpenCL, or Vulkan, the AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT is the superior card. It leads by 61.9% to 67% across all shared benchmarks, and its architectural advantages in shading units, ROPs, memory bandwidth, and FP32 compute are decisive. Anyone choosing between these two for compute-heavy tasks should select the RX 5500 XT without hesitation.

The Radeon Pro 560 retains a narrow edge in aggregate benchmark standing. Its average score of 17,551 ranks at the 61st percentile, placing it alongside the AMD Radeon 780M and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060. The RX 5500 XT’s average of 14,692 dips to the 57th percentile, pulled down by weaker Passmark results. That makes the Pro 560 a more balanced performer across a wider test suite, but its wins are not in the shared head-to-head tests.

The practical decision hinges on the use case. For a desktop build with room for a dual-slot card, a 130 W TDP, and a 300 W power supply, the RX 5500 XT is the clear winner. It offers modern RDNA 1.0 architecture, PCIe 4.0, and nearly triple the memory bandwidth. For a portable or integrated system where the card must fit as an IGP with no power connectors, the Pro 560 is the only viable option. Its 75 W TDP and lack of external power requirements make it suitable for Mac-based or compact chassis designs.

The RX 5500 XT also holds a DirectX 12 (12_1) feature advantage and a newer Vulkan version, which future-proofs it better for software updates. The Pro 560’s end-of-life status and 2017 release date mean it has no forward-looking feature set. The RX 5500 XT, despite also being end-of-life, launched with a 169 USD MSRP and was designed for the mainstream gaming market.

In short, the RX 5500 XT wins every head-to-head benchmark and offers superior specifications across the board. The Pro 560 wins only in the context of integrated form factor suitability and aggregate percentile ranking. Choose the RX 5500 XT for performance, choose the Pro 560 only if the physical constraints of the system demand an IGP-class card.