AMD Radeon Pro 5600M vs AMD Radeon RX 9060 Comparison

The AMD Radeon Pro 5600M and the AMD Radeon RX 9060 represent two distinct eras of GPU design, one an end-of-life mobile solution and the other an active desktop part. The head-to-head benchmark data shows a decisive overall victory for the newer RX 9060, which wins 8 of the 9 shared tests, but the single win for the Pro 5600M is significant. The average benchmark scores place them close in aggregate — 16,351 for the Pro 5600M versus 16,014 for the RX 9060 — yet this similarity masks a wide divergence in individual test performance, driven by their very different architectures and target workloads.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most dramatic disparity appears in the OpenCL compute test. The RX 9060 scores 88,183, which is 45.8% higher than the Pro 5600M’s 47,783. This is the largest single-test gap in either direction, and it sets the tone for the compute-heavy results. The RX 9060 also dominates the Passmark GPU Compute test, posting 9,919 against the Pro 5600M’s 4,031 — a 59.4% advantage. These two results indicate a fundamental difference in raw compute throughput; the RX 9060’s 21.43 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, more than 3.6 times the Pro 5600M’s 5.857 TFLOPS, explains the scale of this lead.

DirectX legacy tests further reinforce the RX 9060’s superiority. In Passmark DirectX 9, the RX 9060 scores 280 versus 118 for the Pro 5600M, a 57.9% delta. The DirectX 11 result is even more lopsided: 182 for the RX 9060 against 59 for the Pro 5600M, a 67.6% gap that represents the biggest percentage win anywhere in the comparison. The DirectX 10 test shows a 40.4% advantage (104 vs 62), and even DirectX 12, where the scores are closer, favors the RX 9060 by 11.4% (44 vs 39). The pattern is consistent: across every DirectX iteration tested, the RX 9060 delivers substantially higher frame rates.

The 3D rendering and 2D performance metrics follow the same trend. Passmark G3D, which measures overall 3D graphics performance, gives the RX 9060 a score of 17,631, a 47.4% improvement over the Pro 5600M’s 9,279. The G2D test, which assesses 2D desktop and compositing workloads, shows the RX 9060 at 1,002 versus 679 for the Pro 5600M, a 32.2% edge. These results are consistent with the RX 9060’s much higher pixel rate of 191.4 GPixel/s and texture rate of 334.9 GTexel/s, compared to the Pro 5600M’s 73.22 GPixel/s and 183.0 GTexel/s, respectively.

The single bright spot for the Pro 5600M is the Vulkan test. Here, the older card scores 46,425 against the RX 9060’s 39,476, a 17.6% advantage. This is a notable outlier, as it is the only test where the Pro 5600M wins, and it does so by a comfortable margin. The result suggests that the Pro 5600M’s architecture, despite its age, handles Vulkan workloads with particular efficiency, or that the RX 9060’s Vulkan drivers are not yet fully optimized. Notably, the RX 9060 has no 3DMark Steel Nomad result in the head-to-head comparison, despite that test being listed in its individual benchmarks, where it scores 3,322.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear conclusion for most users: the RX 9060 is the superior GPU for the vast majority of workloads. Its wins in OpenCL, all four DirectX tests, both Passmark 3D/2D metrics, and GPU compute are decisive, with margins ranging from 11.4% to 67.6%. For anyone running modern DirectX 12 games, compute-heavy applications, or general 3D rendering, the RX 9060 is the obvious choice based on this benchmark evidence. The card’s 21.43 TFLOPS FP32 throughput and 28 ray tracing cores provide a hardware foundation that the Pro 5600M simply cannot match, as reflected in the benchmark scores.

However, the Pro 5600M is not without a niche. Its 17.6% Vulkan win is meaningful for users who rely heavily on Vulkan-based applications or games. The card also carries the advantage of being an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with a 50 W TDP, making it suitable for compact systems where power and space are at a premium. For a user with a specific Vulkan-centric workload on a low-power mobile platform, the Pro 5600M could be the better fit. But for a desktop user seeking broad performance across multiple APIs, the RX 9060’s 8-to-1 win record is compelling. The aggregate scores are nearly identical — the Pro 5600M’s 16,351 average is just 2.1% above the RX 9060’s 16,014 — but this is misleading, as the RX 9060’s wins are in far more common and demanding test categories.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 5600M has a slightly higher average score of 16,351, compared to the AMD Radeon RX 9060’s 16,014. However, this 2.1% difference is dwarfed by the RX 9060’s dominant performance in individual compute and DirectX tests.

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

A: The largest percentage gap is in the Passmark DirectX 11 test, where the AMD Radeon RX 9060 scores 182 versus the Pro 5600M’s 59, a 67.6% advantage. The largest absolute gap is in Geekbench OpenCL, where the RX 9060 scores 88,183 against 47,783.

Q: In which benchmark does the AMD Radeon Pro 5600M outperform the RX 9060?

A: The Pro 5600M wins only the Geekbench Vulkan test, scoring 46,425 against the RX 9060’s 39,476, a 17.6% margin. This is the sole victory in the 9-test head-to-head comparison.

Q: How do the two cards compare in terms of raw FP32 compute power?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 9060 delivers 21.43 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the AMD Radeon Pro 5600M delivers 5.857 TFLOPS. This 3.66x difference is reflected in the OpenCL and GPU Compute benchmark results, where the RX 9060 leads by 45.8% and 59.4%, respectively.

Q: What are the DirectX 12 scores for each card?

A: In the Passmark DirectX 12 test, the AMD Radeon RX 9060 scores 44, while the AMD Radeon Pro 5600M scores 39. This gives the RX 9060 an 11.4% advantage, the narrowest win for the newer card across all DirectX versions.

Q: Which card has the higher pixel rate and texture rate?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 9060 has a pixel rate of 191.4 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 334.9 GTexel/s. The AMD Radeon Pro 5600M has a pixel rate of 73.22 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 183.0 GTexel/s.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ significantly in their core specifications. The AMD Radeon Pro 5600M uses a Navi 12 chip on a 7 nm process, while the AMD Radeon RX 9060 uses a Navi 44 chip on a 4 nm process. The RX 9060 has a transistor count of 29,700 million on a 199 mm² die, with a density of 149.2M per mm²; the Pro 5600M’s transistor count and die size are not listed.

Clock speeds show a large divergence. The Pro 5600M has a base clock of 822 MHz and a boost clock of 1144 MHz, whereas the RX 9060 has a base clock of 1700 MHz, a game clock of 2400 MHz, and a boost clock of 2990 MHz. Memory configurations also differ: the Pro 5600M uses 8 GB of HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus with 394.2 GB/s bandwidth, while the RX 9060 uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth.

The compute unit counts are not directly listed, but the shading unit counts differ: the Pro 5600M has 2560 shading units, 160 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, while the RX 9060 has 1792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The RX 9060 adds 28 ray tracing cores, which the Pro 5600M lacks. The RX 9060 has a TDP of 132 W and requires a single 8-pin power connector with a suggested 300 W PSU, while the Pro 5600M is an IGP with a 50 W TDP and no power connectors. The bus interface also differs: the Pro 5600M uses PCIe 4.0 x16, and the RX 9060 uses PCIe 5.0 x16.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap is generational. The AMD Radeon Pro 5600M is built on RDNA 1.0, while the AMD Radeon RX 9060 uses RDNA 4.0. This spans multiple iterations of AMD’s graphics architecture, bringing significant changes in efficiency and feature support. The RX 9060 is part of the Radeon RX 9000 series and the Navi IV (RX 9000) generation, with a codename of Strix Point. The Pro 5600M belongs to the Radeon Pro Mac (Navi Mobile) generation.

The process node difference is stark: 4 nm for the RX 9060 versus 7 nm for the Pro 5600M, both fabricated by TSMC. This allows the RX 9060 to pack 29,700 million transistors into a 199 mm² die, though the Pro 5600M’s transistor count is not specified for direct comparison. The RX 9060 features 28 ray tracing cores, a hardware capability absent from the Pro 5600M, and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) compared to the Pro 5600M’s DirectX 12 (12_1). The RX 9060 also supports Vulkan 1.4, while the Pro 5600M supports Vulkan 1.3. FP16 performance differs in ratio: the RX 9060 runs FP16 at 1:1 with FP32 (21.43 TFLOPS), while the Pro 5600M runs FP16 at 2:1 (11.71 TFLOPS). The RX 9060 has a 300 W suggested PSU and is a dual-slot card with 1x HDMI 2.1b and 2x DisplayPort 2.1a outputs, while the Pro 5600M has portable device dependent outputs.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon RX 9060 wins in every compute and graphics category tested except Vulkan. Its OpenCL score of 88,183 and GPU Compute score of 9,919 make it the clear choice for general-purpose compute, machine learning inference, and any workload that leverages raw FP32 throughput. Its decisive wins in DirectX 9 (280 vs 118), DirectX 10 (104 vs 62), DirectX 11 (182 vs 59), and DirectX 12 (44 vs 39) make it the superior option for gaming across legacy and modern APIs. The G3D score of 17,631 versus 9,279 indicates it handles 3D rendering tasks far more effectively, and the G2D score of 1,002 versus 679 shows better desktop compositing performance. Users running modern games, 3D modeling, or compute-heavy applications should choose the RX 9060.

The AMD Radeon Pro 5600M wins only the Geekbench Vulkan test, with a score of 46,425 against the RX 9060’s 39,476. This makes it the preferred option for applications that are heavily optimized for Vulkan, such as certain cross-platform game engines or professional visualization tools. Additionally, its status as an IGP with a 50 W TDP means it draws significantly less power and requires no external power connector, making it suitable for thin-and-light laptops or systems with strict power budgets. For users prioritizing Vulkan performance in a low-power mobile form factor, the Pro 5600M remains a viable, if end-of-life, choice.