AMD Radeon Pro 5600M vs AMD Radeon Vega 11 Comparison

# AMD Radeon Pro 5600M vs AMD Radeon Vega 11

The database places the AMD Radeon Pro 5600M and the AMD Radeon Vega 11 in different market segments, but their benchmark results put them in direct competition. The Pro 5600M is a discrete mobile-class part built on the 7 nm process, while the Vega 11 is an integrated graphics processor on a 12 nm node. The recorded data shows a clear performance advantage for the discrete solution, with the gap varying by API. This analysis walks through the specifications, the architectural differences, and the head-to-head benchmark results to determine which part fits which workload.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is the AMD Radeon Pro 5600M based on?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 5600M uses the Navi 12 chip with the RDNA 1.0 architecture, built on a 7 nm process at TSMC.

Q: What is the transistor count and die size of the AMD Radeon Vega 11?

A: The AMD Radeon Vega 11 integrates 4,940 million transistors on a 210 mm² die, for a transistor density of 23.5 million per mm².

Q: What are the API supports of each GPU?

A: The Radeon Pro 5600M supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The Vega 11 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3 as well.

Q: What is the average benchmark score of each GPU?

A: The Radeon Pro 5600M has an average benchmark score of 16351, while the Vega 11 has an average score of 14352. The Pro 5600M ranks in the 59th percentile of all GPUs, while the Vega 11 ranks in the 56th percentile.

Q: Which GPU has a higher memory bandwidth?

A: The Radeon Pro 5600M has a dedicated 8 GB HBM2 memory subsystem with a 2048-bit bus and 394.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The Vega 11 uses system shared memory, so its bandwidth is system dependent.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs represent different design philosophies within AMD's lineup. The Radeon Pro 5600M is a discrete solution based on the Navi 12 chip, employing the RDNA 1.0 architecture. It is built on a 7 nm process at TSMC. The Vega 11, on the other hand, is an integrated graphics solution that AMD calls the Picasso generation, built on the GCN 5.0 architecture. It uses the 12 nm process at GlobalFoundries and carries the Picasso IGP generation label.

The core configuration differs substantially. The Pro 5600M packs 2,560 shaders and 160 texture mapping units, with 64 ROPs. The Vega 11 is much leaner with 704 shaders, 44 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. The discrete card has a 50 W TDP, while the integrated Vega 11 has a 15 W TDP. The Pro 5600M relies on a PCIe 4.0 x16 interface, whereas the Vega 11 uses the motherboard's integrated GPU interface.

Clock speeds also tell a different story. The Pro 5600M has a base clock of 822 MHz and a boost of 1144 MHz. The Vega 11 has a lower base of 300 MHz but a higher boost of 1400 MHz. Memory arrangements are fundamentally different: the discrete uses 8 GB of HBM2, while the integrated part draws on system shared memory.

The Verdict

From the recorded data alone, the AMD Radeon Pro 5600M is the clear performance pick. It wins all three head-to-head benchmark comparisons in the database and leads in the average score. The Pro 5600M looks a good fit for users who need a dedicated GPU in a portable chassis. The Vega 11, while competitive against other integrated graphics, is outclassed here; it loses all comparisons to the Pro 5600M.

Specification Differences

The parts differ in almost every major hardware category. The most significant is the memory system: the Pro 5600M has 8 GB of dedicated HBM2 memory with a 394.2 GB/s bandwidth, while the Vega 11 has no dedicated memory at all and relies on system shared memory. The Pro 5600M is a discrete chip (Navi 12) on the RDNA 1.0 architecture, whereas the Vega 11 is a Picasso integrated GPU on GCN 5.0.

The process and foundry also differ: 7 nm at TSMC for the Pro 5600M, 12 nm at GlobalFoundries for Vega 11. This results in different transistor counts (4,940 million for the Pro 5600M) and die size (210 mm²), while the Vega's transistor count is not listed in the database. The Pro 5600M has more shading units (2560), texture units (160), and ROPs (64) compared to the Vega 11's 704 shaders, 44 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. The Pro 5600M's power draw is more than three times higher, 50W vs 15W. For interfaces, the Pro 5600M uses PCIe 4.0 x16, while the Vega 11 uses the IGP bus.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are decisive in every test. In Geekbench Metal, the Radeon Pro 5600M records 55,030 points versus 17,392, a 216.4% lead. The OpenCL test shows the Pro 5600M at 47,783 against the Vega 11's 13,392, a 256.8% delta. In Vulkan, the Pro 5600M scores 46,425, while the Vega 11 scores 12,273, a 278.3% advantage. All three head-to-head wins go to the AMD Radeon Pro 5600M.

The average benchmark score puts this into perspective. The Pro 560M's average of 16,351 is only 0.1% behind the Radeon RX 5700 XT, 0.3% behind the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell, and 0.4% behind the Radeon PRO W7500. It stays very close to the GeForce RTX 5090 D V2, just 0.9% away. This places the Pro 5600M in the 59th percentile of all GPUs.

The Vega 11, with an average score of 14,352, is 0.1% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN, 0.2% behind the AMD Radeon RX Vega 11, and 0.3% ahead of the Intel Iris Xe MAX. It ranks the Vega 11 in the 56th percentile of all GPUs.

Where Each One Wins

Based on the benchmark splits, the Radeon Pro 5600M is the choice for any workload that touches the GPU. It wins every recorded benchmark: Metal, OpenCL, and Vulkan. The Vega 11 is not able to match the discrete Pro 5600M in any of the three tests. For users who need maximum rendering performance, the Pro 5600M is the clear choice.

The Vega 11's smaller footprint belongs to a different type of task. Its low 15W TDP and system-shared memory make it a fit for systems where a discrete GPU is not possible and where the IGP is the only option. However, the data shows that for pure performance, the Pro 560M is far ahead. The Vega 11 remains a part for integrated graphics duties, while the Pro 5600M is for users who need the full throughput of a dedicated mobile GPU.