AMD Radeon Pro 5600M vs NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation Comparison

The Verdict

The recorded data points to a decisive outcome: the NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation wins all nine head-to-head benchmark comparisons against the AMD Radeon Pro 5600M. The NVIDIA card's average benchmark score of 18954 versus AMD's 16351 places it ahead by roughly 16% in aggregate performance. The NVIDIA part also lands at the 63rd percentile among all GPUs in the database, while the AMD part sits at the 59th percentile.

For professionals or creators who need maximum compute throughput, ray tracing support, and a modern feature set, the RTX 2000 Ada Generation is the clear pick. Its 12.00 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, 16 GB of GDDR6 memory, and 22 RT cores provide a substantial capability advantage over the older AMD part. The AMD Radeon Pro 5600M, with its 5.857 TFLOPS FP32 and 8 GB of HBM2, remains viable only for legacy workloads or systems where its 50 W power envelope and integrated form factor are mandatory constraints. The AMD part is end-of-life, whereas the NVIDIA card is still in active production, which matters for long-term availability and driver support.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations and design philosophies. The NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation uses the AD107 chip on TSMC's 5 nm process, built on the Ada Lovelace architecture. It packs 18,900 million transistors into a 159 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 118.9 million per square millimeter. The AMD Radeon Pro 5600M uses the Navi 12 chip on TSMC's 7 nm process, based on the older RDNA 1.0 architecture. The database does not list transistor count or die size for the AMD part, but the process node difference alone signals a generational gap.

The NVIDIA card includes dedicated RT cores (22 of them) and tensor cores (88), which enable hardware-accelerated ray tracing and AI workloads. The AMD part has no listed RT cores or tensor cores, meaning it lacks those dedicated acceleration blocks entirely. In shading hardware, NVIDIA has 2816 shading units, 88 texture mapping units, and 48 ROPs. AMD counters with 2560 shading units, 160 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The AMD part actually has more TMUs and ROPs, but that advantage does not translate into benchmark wins.

Memory architecture differs sharply. NVIDIA uses 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. AMD uses 8 GB of HBM2 on a much wider 2048-bit bus, achieving 394.2 GB/s of bandwidth. Despite having less than half the capacity, the AMD memory subsystem provides 54% more bandwidth. That bandwidth edge is not enough to overcome the NVIDIA card's raw compute advantages.

Clock speeds also diverge. The NVIDIA card runs at a 1620 MHz base and 2130 MHz boost, with memory at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective). The AMD part clocks much lower: 822 MHz base, 1144 MHz boost, and memory at 770 MHz (1540 Mbps effective). The NVIDIA card's higher clocks, combined with newer architecture, produce substantially higher fill rates: 102.2 GPixel/s versus 73.22 GPixel/s, and 187.4 GTexel/s versus 183.0 GTexel/s.

API support also favors NVIDIA. The RTX 2000 Ada Generation supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), Vulkan 1.4, and OpenGL 4.6. The AMD part supports DirectX 12 (12_1), Vulkan 1.3, and OpenGL 4.6. The newer DirectX feature level and Vulkan revision on the NVIDIA side indicate better forward compatibility.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation wins every single recorded benchmark comparison, with nine wins and zero losses. The magnitude of the victories varies significantly across test categories.

In compute-oriented tests, the NVIDIA card shows its strength. In Geekbench OpenCL, the NVIDIA card scores 78074 versus AMD's 47783, a 63.4% advantage. In Geekbench Vulkan, the gap widens to 79.6% (83360 versus 46425). The PassMark GPU Compute test shows the largest relative margin: NVIDIA scores 7834 against AMD's 4031, a 94.3% lead. These results indicate that the NVIDIA architecture handles general-purpose and compute workloads far more efficiently, likely aided by its tensor cores and newer scheduling hardware.

DirectX legacy tests show the NVIDIA card pulling away further. In PassMark DirectX 11, NVIDIA scores 138 versus AMD's 59, a 133.9% advantage, the largest single delta in the comparison. PassMark DirectX 9 gives NVIDIA 216 against AMD's 118, an 83.1% lead. PassMark DirectX 12 shows NVIDIA at 71 versus AMD's 39, an 82.1% margin. PassMark DirectX 10 results are closer but still favor NVIDIA: 82 versus 62, a 32.3% lead. The pattern suggests that NVIDIA's driver optimization and hardware efficiency extend across both older and newer API generations.

Rasterization and 2D workloads follow the same trend. In PassMark G3D, NVIDIA scores 16927 versus AMD's 9279, an 82.4% advantage. In PassMark G2D, NVIDIA posts 1072 against AMD's 679, a 57.9% lead. These results align with the NVIDIA card's higher pixel rate (102.2 GPixel/s versus 73.22 GPixel/s) and its 2.05x FP32 throughput advantage.

The only benchmark where AMD's Radeon Pro 5600M appears in the database but not in the head-to-head list is Geekbench Metal, where AMD scores 55030. That test is not included in the comparison table, so it does not factor into the win tally. Still, the NVIDIA card's nearest rivals in the database include the NVIDIA Quadro K6000 (average score 19030, delta -0.4%), the AMD Radeon RX 6600 (19036, -0.4%), the NVIDIA Tesla K80 (18866, +0.5%), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile (19049, -0.5%). The AMD Radeon Pro 5600M's nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT (16361, -0.1%), NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell (16408, -0.3%), AMD Radeon PRO W7500 (16415, -0.4%), and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D V2 (16504, -0.9%). These rival lists confirm that the NVIDIA card competes in a higher performance tier than the AMD part.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ on nearly every specification field in the database. The NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation has a 5 nm process node versus AMD's 7 nm. The NVIDIA card's chip, AD107, contains 18,900 million transistors on a 159 mm² die; the AMD chip, Navi 12, has no listed transistor count or die size. The NVIDIA card uses 16 GB of GDDR6 memory with a 128-bit bus and 256.0 GB/s bandwidth. The AMD card uses 8 GB of HBM2 with a 2048-bit bus and 394.2 GB/s bandwidth.

Compute resources differ as well. NVIDIA has 2816 shading units, 88 TMUs, 48 ROPs, 22 RT cores, and 88 tensor cores. AMD has 2560 shading units, 160 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, with no RT cores or tensor cores listed. Clock speeds are substantially higher on the NVIDIA card: 1620 MHz base and 2130 MHz boost versus AMD's 822 MHz base and 1144 MHz boost. Memory clocks also differ: 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) for NVIDIA versus 770 MHz (1540 Mbps effective) for AMD.

Performance rates diverge accordingly. NVIDIA's pixel rate is 102.2 GPixel/s, texture rate is 187.4 GTexel/s, FP32 is 12.00 TFLOPS, and FP16 is 12.00 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio). AMD's pixel rate is 73.22 GPixel/s, texture rate is 183.0 GTexel/s, FP32 is 5.857 TFLOPS, and FP16 is 11.71 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio). The NVIDIA card has a 70 W TDP and dual-slot width with no power connectors and a suggested PSU of 250 W. The AMD card has a 50 W TDP and is listed as IGP (integrated graphics processor) form factor with no power connectors and no suggested PSU.

Bus interfaces differ: PCIe 4.0 x8 for NVIDIA versus PCIe 4.0 x16 for AMD. Display outputs also differ: NVIDIA provides 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a, while AMD's outputs are listed as "Portable Device Dependent," reflecting its intended use in mobile systems. Physical dimensions are only listed for the NVIDIA card: 168 mm length (6.6 inches) and 69 mm height (2.7 inches); AMD has no dimensions recorded. The NVIDIA card's launch MSRP is 649 USD.

Production status also separates the two: NVIDIA's card is Active, while AMD's is End-of-life. Release dates reflect this: the NVIDIA card launched on February 11, 2024, while the AMD card launched on June 14, 2020. The NVIDIA card's predecessor is Workstation Ampere and its successor is Blackwell PRO W; the AMD card has no listed predecessor or successor.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute performance in FP32?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation offers 12.00 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, more than double the AMD Radeon Pro 5600M's 5.857 TFLOPS.

Q: How much memory bandwidth does each card provide?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 5600M provides 394.2 GB/s of bandwidth from its 2048-bit HBM2 interface, while the NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation provides 256.0 GB/s from a 128-bit GDDR6 interface.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon Pro 5600M support hardware ray tracing?

A: No. The database lists no RT cores for the AMD part. The NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation includes 22 RT cores and 88 tensor cores for ray tracing and AI workloads.

Q: What is the largest benchmark margin between the two cards?

A: The largest margin is in PassMark DirectX 11, where the NVIDIA card scores 138 versus AMD's 59, a 133.9% advantage.

Q: Are both cards still in production?

A: No. The NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation is listed as Active production status. The AMD Radeon Pro 5600M is listed as End-of-life.

Q: Which card has higher memory capacity?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation has 16 GB of GDDR6 memory, double the 8 GB of HBM2 in the AMD Radeon Pro 5600M.