AMD Radeon Pro 560 vs NVIDIA T400 Comparison

The AMD Radeon Pro 560 and the NVIDIA T400 are both end-of-life workstation graphics cards, but they represent fundamentally different approaches to the low-power segment. The data shows a near-perfect split in benchmark wins: the AMD card takes the Vulkan test, while the NVIDIA card wins the OpenCL test. The Radeon Pro 560 carries a 61st percentile ranking across all GPUs, while the T400 sits just behind at the 60th percentile, making their overall performance positions nearly identical despite their architectural differences.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark results reveal a clear division of labor based on API. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the NVIDIA T400 decisively outperforms the AMD Radeon Pro 560, scoring 17,039 against 15,504. That is a 9% advantage for the T400, which is a substantial margin in this performance class. OpenCL workloads, which often stress raw compute throughput and driver optimization, clearly favor the NVIDIA architecture.

Conversely, the AMD Radeon Pro 560 wins the Geekbench Vulkan test, scoring 16,232 against the T400's 15,976. The margin here is much narrower at 1.6%, but it is still a win. Vulkan's lower-level hardware access appears to benefit the AMD card's design. For users running Vulkan-based applications, the Radeon Pro 560 holds a measurable edge, however slight.

The average benchmark scores reinforce this split. The Radeon Pro 560 averages 17,551 across its three tests, while the T400 averages 16,508 across its two. This gives the AMD card a raw average advantage of roughly 6.3%, but the comparison is complicated by the fact that the AMD card has a Metal benchmark in its suite, which the NVIDIA card lacks. The T400's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D V2 with a delta of 0%, and the AMD Radeon PRO W7500 at 0.6% — indicating the T400 sits in a tightly packed performance band. The Radeon Pro 560, meanwhile, is essentially tied with the AMD Radeon 780M (-0.2%) and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 (-0.5%).

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different manufacturing generations and process nodes. The AMD Radeon Pro 560 uses the Polaris 21 chip built on GCN 4.0 architecture, fabricated by GlobalFoundries on a 14 nm process. The NVIDIA T400 uses the TU117 chip based on Turing architecture, fabricated by TSMC on a 12 nm process. This node difference is notable: 14 nm versus 12 nm, with the smaller process potentially allowing for higher clock speeds and better efficiency.

The transistor counts differ significantly. The AMD chip contains 3,000 million transistors on a 123 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 24.4 million per mm². The NVIDIA chip packs 4,700 million transistors onto a 200 mm² die, resulting in a density of 23.5 million per mm². The T400 has more transistors overall, but the Radeon Pro 560 has a slightly higher density, suggesting a more compact arrangement of its functional units.

The shading unit counts are starkly different. The Radeon Pro 560 has 1,024 shading units, while the T400 has only 384. This 2.67x difference in shader count is partially offset by the T400's much higher boost clock. The T400 boosts to 1425 MHz, whereas the AMD card's boost clock is not listed, but its base clock is also absent from the data. The T400's memory clock is 1250 MHz with 10 Gbps effective, while the AMD card runs at 1270 MHz with 5.1 Gbps effective. The memory type also differs: GDDR5 for AMD versus GDDR6 for NVIDIA.

The memory subsystems diverge in capacity and bus width. The Radeon Pro 560 has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 81.28 GB/s of bandwidth. The T400 has 2 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, delivering 80.00 GB/s. Despite having half the bus width, the T400 nearly matches the AMD card's bandwidth thanks to its faster GDDR6 memory.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark data provides the clearest picture of how these two cards compare. In Geekbench OpenCL, the NVIDIA T400 wins with a score of 17,039 against the AMD Radeon Pro 560's 15,504. The delta percentage is -9, meaning the AMD card trails by 9%. This is the largest performance gap between the two cards in any test. The T400's advantage here likely stems from its Turing architecture's compute capabilities and higher effective memory speed.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the AMD Radeon Pro 560 wins with a score of 16,232 against the T400's 15,976. The delta is 1.6% in AMD's favor. This is a much closer contest, but it demonstrates that the AMD card is not universally slower. The Vulkan result shows that the Radeon Pro 560 can hold its own in modern low-level APIs, despite its older GCN architecture.

Looking at the individual benchmark suites, the AMD card's Metal score of 20,918 is its strongest result, and it has no counterpart in the NVIDIA data. This Metal advantage is significant for macOS users, as the Radeon Pro 560 is explicitly part of the Radeon Pro Mac generation. The T400, as a Quadro Turing product, is not tested with Metal. The OpenCL scores show the T400 at 17,039 versus the AMD at 15,504, while the Vulkan scores show AMD at 16,232 versus NVIDIA at 15,976.

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 560 has an average benchmark score of 17,551, while the NVIDIA T400 averages 16,508. The AMD card's average is higher, though it includes a Metal test that the NVIDIA card does not have.

Q: How do the two cards compare in OpenCL performance specifically?

A: The NVIDIA T400 wins the OpenCL test with a score of 17,039, which is 9% higher than the AMD Radeon Pro 560's score of 15,504.

Q: Which card performs better in Vulkan applications?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 560 wins the Vulkan test with a score of 16,232, edging out the NVIDIA T400's 15,976 by a margin of 1.6%.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference between the two cards?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 560 has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory, while the NVIDIA T400 has 2 GB of GDDR6 memory. Despite the capacity difference, their bandwidth is similar: 81.28 GB/s for AMD and 80.00 GB/s for NVIDIA.

Q: How do their percentile rankings compare?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 560 ranks in the 61st percentile of all GPUs, while the NVIDIA T400 ranks in the 60th percentile. This places them at essentially the same overall performance tier.

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

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 560 has a TDP of 75 W, while the NVIDIA T400 has a much lower TDP of 30 W. The T400 also suggests a 200 W power supply, while the AMD card lists no suggested PSU.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every major specification category. The process node differs: AMD uses 14 nm from GlobalFoundries, while NVIDIA uses 12 nm from TSMC. The transistor count is 3,000 million for AMD versus 4,700 million for NVIDIA, with die sizes of 123 mm² and 200 mm² respectively. The transistor density is 24.4M per mm² for the AMD card versus 23.5M per mm² for the NVIDIA card.

The clock speeds show a significant difference in boost behavior. The NVIDIA T400 has a base clock of 420 MHz and a boost clock of 1425 MHz. The AMD Radeon Pro 560 has no listed base or boost clocks, but its memory clock is 1270 MHz with 5.1 Gbps effective, versus the T400's 1250 MHz with 10 Gbps effective.

Memory configurations diverge sharply. The AMD card has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, while the NVIDIA card has 2 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus. Their bandwidth is nearly identical at 81.28 GB/s and 80.00 GB/s, respectively. The shading unit counts differ dramatically: 1,024 for AMD versus 384 for NVIDIA. The TMU counts are 64 for AMD versus 24 for NVIDIA, while both have 16 ROPs.

The compute rates show contrasting strengths. The AMD card delivers 1.858 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 1.858 TFLOPS of FP16 (at a 1:1 ratio). The NVIDIA card delivers 1,094.4 GFLOPS of FP32 (approximately 1.094 TFLOPS) but 2.189 TFLOPS of FP16 (at a 2:1 ratio). This means the T400 has significantly higher FP16 throughput, while the AMD card has higher FP32 throughput.

The power profiles are distinctly different. The AMD card has a 75 W TDP and is designed as an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with no power connectors, while the NVIDIA card has a 30 W TDP, is single-slot, and suggests a 200 W PSU. The bus interfaces differ: PCIe 3.0 x8 for AMD versus PCIe 3.0 x16 for NVIDIA. Display outputs also vary, with the AMD card being "Portable Device Dependent" and the NVIDIA card offering 3x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear split recommendation based on workload. For OpenCL-heavy compute tasks, the NVIDIA T400 is the better choice, offering a 9% performance advantage over the AMD Radeon Pro 560. Its higher FP16 throughput (2.189 TFLOPS versus 1.858 TFLOPS) and lower power draw (30 W versus 75 W) make it a more efficient compute engine for applications that leverage these capabilities.

For Vulkan-based workloads, the AMD Radeon Pro 560 wins, albeit narrowly, with a 1.6% lead. The AMD card also offers double the memory capacity (4 GB versus 2 GB), which matters for texture-heavy workloads that exceed 2 GB. Its higher FP32 throughput (1.858 TFLOPS versus 1.094 TFLOPS) also gives it an edge in traditional graphics rendering.

The average benchmark scores favor the AMD card (17,551 versus 16,508), but the missing Metal test for the NVIDIA card complicates that comparison. The percentile rankings are nearly identical (61st versus 60th), indicating these are closely matched products overall. The AMD Radeon Pro 560 is the choice for Vulkan and memory-hungry applications, while the NVIDIA T400 is the choice for OpenCL compute and power-constrained environments. Neither card dominates the other across all metrics; the selection should be driven by the specific API and workload characteristics of the target applications.