AMD Radeon Pro 5600M vs AMD Radeon Pro 560X Comparison

The AMD Radeon Pro 5600M and AMD Radeon Pro 560X are both end-of-life mobile GPUs from AMD’s Radeon Pro Mac lineup, but they represent two very different generations of graphics architecture. The 5600M is built on the modern RDNA 1.0 design with a 7 nm process, while the 560X uses the older GCN 4.0 architecture on a 14 nm node. Benchmark data shows a decisive performance gap between them, with the 5600M winning all three head-to-head tests by margins ranging from 176% to nearly 400%. This analysis breaks down the exact scores, architectural differences, and practical use cases based solely on the provided data.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The performance disparity between these two GPUs is stark, and the numbers leave no room for ambiguity. In the Geekbench Metal test, the 5600M scores 55,030, which is 193.3% higher than the 560X’s 18,763. That is not a marginal improvement; it is a near-tripling of raw compute throughput in Apple’s Metal API. For OpenCL, the gap widens even further: the 5600M posts 47,783 against the 560X’s 9,663, a delta of 394.5%. This suggests the 5600M is dramatically better suited for compute-heavy workloads that leverage OpenCL, likely due to its newer architecture and higher shader count.

The Vulkan results tell a similar story, though the margin is slightly smaller. The 5600M reaches 46,425, while the 560X manages 16,819, giving the 5600M a 176% advantage. Across all three API tests, the 5600M wins 3 out of 3 head-to-head matchups. The 560X does not win a single benchmark in this comparison. When looking at average benchmark scores, the 5600M sits at 16,351, which is only 0.1% below the AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT and 0.3% below the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell. This places it firmly in desktop-class territory despite its 50 W TDP. The 560X, by contrast, averages 15,082, sitting just 0.1% above the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 Ti and 0.6% below the AMD Radeon RX 7600.

It is worth remembering the 5600M’s percentile ranking is 59th among all GPUs, while the 560X ranks 57th. Despite the massive raw score differences in specific tests, their overall percentile positions are closer, which reflects how the average benchmark score normalizes across a wider range of workloads. Still, in the three tests where both were measured, the 5600M is categorically faster.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is foundational. The 5600M uses the Navi 12 chip with RDNA 1.0 architecture, manufactured on TSMC’s 7 nm process. The 560X uses the Polaris 21 chip with GCN 4.0 architecture, built on GlobalFoundries’ 14 nm node. This process difference alone explains much of the efficiency and performance gap—7 nm allows for significantly higher transistor density and lower power draw per unit of work.

In terms of compute resources, the 5600M has 2,560 shading units, 160 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 64 render output units (ROPs). The 560X has 1,024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and just 16 ROPs. That is 2.5 times the shader count, 2.5 times the TMUs, and 4 times the ROPs. These are not incremental changes; they represent a full generational leap. The 5600M also features 8 GB of HBM2 memory on a 2048-bit bus, delivering 394.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The 560X has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, yielding 94.08 GB/s. The memory bandwidth difference is over 4x, which is critical for high-resolution textures and compute workloads.

Clock speeds further separate them. The 5600M has a base clock of 822 MHz and a boost clock of 1144 MHz, with memory running at 770 MHz (1540 Mbps effective). The 560X has no listed base or boost clock in the data, but its memory runs at 1470 MHz (5.9 Gbps effective). Pixel rate for the 5600M is 73.22 GPixel/s versus 16.06 GPixel/s for the 560X. Texture rate is 183.0 GTexel/s versus 64.26 GTexel/s. Floating-point performance (FP32) is 5.857 TFLOPS for the 5600M and 2.056 TFLOPS for the 560X. The 5600M also supports FP16 at 11.71 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, while the 560X’s FP16 is identical to its FP32 at 2.056 TFLOPS (1:1). The 5600M uses PCIe 4.0 x16, while the 560X uses PCIe 3.0 x8.

Power consumption is another defining difference. The 5600M has a TDP of 50 W, while the 560X draws 75 W. Despite consuming 33% less power, the 5600M delivers dramatically higher performance, which is a direct result of the architecture and process improvements. Both are integrated into laptops (IGP slot width) with no power connectors and portable-device-dependent display outputs. The 560X also has a listed transistor count of 3,000 million on a 123 mm² die, but no equivalent data is provided for the 5600M.

Where Each One Wins

Given the benchmark results, the 5600M wins in every measurable category that was tested. If you need maximum compute performance in Metal, OpenCL, or Vulkan, the 5600M is the only rational choice. Its 394.5% lead in OpenCL makes it particularly suited for GPU-accelerated rendering, scientific simulations, or machine learning inference tasks that rely on OpenCL. The 176% Vulkan advantage also makes it the better option for cross-platform graphics workloads that use Vulkan as the primary API.

The 560X does have one theoretical advantage: its lower absolute specs might be easier to cool in a thin chassis, but the data does not support that claim with any numbers. The 560X’s 75 W TDP is actually higher than the 5600M’s 50 W, so there is no power efficiency benefit. The 560X’s only real strength is that it exists in systems that were designed for it, which means it is the only option if you are stuck with that hardware. For anyone choosing between these two, the 560X has no benchmark-based use case where it outperforms the 5600M.

The 5600M’s 8 GB of HBM2 memory versus the 560X’s 4 GB of GDDR5 is also decisive for modern workloads. Larger memory capacity and 4.2x the bandwidth mean the 5600M can handle larger datasets and higher-resolution textures without hitting memory bottlenecks. The 560X’s 94.08 GB/s bandwidth is a severe limitation for anything beyond light 1080p gaming or basic productivity. The 5600M, with 394.2 GB/s, is in a different class entirely.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the AMD Radeon Pro 5600M is the superior GPU in every benchmark where both were tested. It wins 3 out of 3 head-to-head comparisons, with deltas of 176%, 193.3%, and 394.5%. Its average benchmark score of 16,351 places it within 0.1% of the AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT, a desktop card, while the 560X’s average of 15,082 puts it in the same league as the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 Ti. If you are configuring a system and have the choice, the 5600M is the only sensible pick.

Who should pick the 5600M? Anyone running GPU-accelerated applications that leverage Metal, OpenCL, or Vulkan. The 394.5% OpenCL lead is particularly compelling for compute-heavy tasks. Its 8 GB HBM2 memory and 2048-bit bus make it suitable for larger workloads and higher resolutions. The 50 W TDP also means it can deliver this performance in a more power-efficient package than the 560X.

Who should pick the 560X? Based strictly on the data, the answer is no one who has a choice. The 560X does not win a single benchmark in this comparison. Its 4 GB GDDR5 memory and 128-bit bus are architectural relics compared to the 5600M’s HBM2. The only scenario where the 560X makes sense is if you are using a pre-existing system that only supports that GPU and cannot be upgraded. For new purchases, the 5600M is the only data-backed recommendation.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the AMD Radeon Pro 5600M than the 560X in Geekbench Metal?

A: The 5600M scores 55,030 versus the 560X’s 18,763, which is a 193.3% improvement.

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

A: The largest delta is in Geekbench OpenCL, where the 5600M scores 47,783 compared to the 560X’s 9,663, a 394.5% difference.

Q: Which GPU has more memory bandwidth?

A: The 5600M has 394.2 GB/s of bandwidth with 8 GB of HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus. The 560X has 94.08 GB/s with 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus.

Q: How do their power requirements compare?

A: The 5600M has a TDP of 50 W, while the 560X has a TDP of 75 W. The 5600M uses less power while delivering significantly higher performance.

Q: What are the average benchmark scores for each GPU?

A: The 5600M has an average benchmark score of 16,351, which is 0.1% below the AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT. The 560X averages 15,082, which is 0.1% above the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 Ti.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same APIs?

A: Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.3. The 5600M supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while the 560X supports DirectX 12 (12_0).

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon Pro 5600M | AMD Radeon Pro 560X |

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

| Chip | Navi 12 | Polaris 21 |

| Architecture | RDNA 1.0 | GCN 4.0 |

| Process Node | 7 nm (TSMC) | 14 nm (GlobalFoundries) |

| Transistors | Not listed | 3,000 million |

| Die Size | Not listed | 123 mm² |

| Base Clock | 822 MHz | Not listed |

| Boost Clock | 1144 MHz | Not listed |

| Memory Clock | 770 MHz (1540 Mbps effective) | 1470 MHz (5.9 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 8 GB | 4 GB |

| Memory Type | HBM2 | GDDR5 |

| Memory Bus Width | 2048 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 394.2 GB/s | 94.08 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 2560 | 1024 |

| TMUs | 160 | 64 |

| ROPs | 64 | 16 |

| Pixel Rate | 73.22 GPixel/s | 16.06 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 183.0 GTexel/s | 64.26 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 5.857 TFLOPS | 2.056 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 11.71 TFLOPS (2:1) | 2.056 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 50 W | 75 W |

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

| DirectX Support | 12 (12_1) | 12 (12_0) |