AMD Radeon Pro 560X vs AMD Radeon PRO W7500 Comparison

# AMD Radeon PRO W7500 vs AMD Radeon Pro 560X

The AMD Radeon PRO W7500 and AMD Radeon Pro 560X occupy opposite ends of the professional graphics spectrum, separated by five years of architectural evolution. The W7500 is an active, RDNA 3.0-based workstation card built on TSMC's 6 nm process, while the 560X is an end-of-life, GCN 4.0-era mobile-class IGP from GlobalFoundries' 14 nm node. Benchmark data shows the W7500 delivering a 502.4% higher OpenCL score and a 308.1% higher Vulkan score in direct head-to-head comparisons, reflecting a generational leap in compute throughput, memory bandwidth, and feature support. The following analysis breaks down the architectural, specification, and benchmark differences between these two AMD professional offerings.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7500 posts an average benchmark score of 16415, compared to 15082 for the AMD Radeon Pro 560X. The W7500 sits at the 59th percentile of all GPUs, while the 560X sits at the 57th percentile.

Q: How large is the performance gap in OpenCL compute?

A: In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the W7500 scores 58213 versus 9663 for the 560X, a 502.4% advantage for the W7500. This is the largest single-test delta between the two cards.

Q: Does the Radeon Pro 560X support any API that the W7500 does not?

A: No. The 560X supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The W7500 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, meaning the W7500 offers a higher DirectX feature level and a newer Vulkan version.

Q: What are the memory capacity and type differences?

A: The W7500 comes with 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 256.0 GB/s bandwidth. The 560X has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, providing 94.08 GB/s bandwidth. The W7500 has both double the capacity and roughly 2.7 times the bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has a higher transistor density?

A: The W7500's Navi 33 chip packs 13,300 million transistors into a 204 mm² die, yielding a density of 65.2M transistors per mm². The 560X's Polaris 21 die contains 3,000 million transistors across 123 mm², for a density of 24.4M per mm².

Q: Is the Radeon Pro 560X still in production?

A: No. The 560X is marked as end-of-life, with a release date of 2018-07-15. The W7500 is listed as active production, having launched on 2023-08-02.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two GPUs is fundamental. The W7500 uses the RDNA 3.0 architecture on a 6 nm TSMC process, featuring the Navi 33 chip with a codename of "Hotpink Bonefish." The 560X relies on the older GCN 4.0 architecture on GlobalFoundries' 14 nm process, built around the Polaris 21 chip. This generational shift brings significant changes in compute organization, feature support, and efficiency.

The W7500 delivers 12.19 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 24.37 TFLOPS of FP16 via a 2:1 ratio, indicating dedicated half-precision throughput. The 560X manages 2.056 TFLOPS for both FP32 and FP16, operating at a 1:1 ratio with no dedicated half-precision path. The W7500 also includes 28 ray-tracing cores, a feature entirely absent from the 560X, which has no RT cores listed. This makes the W7500 compatible with DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the 560X tops out at DirectX 12 (12_0).

Shader resources differ substantially: the W7500 has 1792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 64 ROPs, versus 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and only 16 ROPs for the 560X. Pixel and texture fill rates reflect this — the W7500 reaches 108.8 GPixel/s and 190.4 GTexel/s, while the 560X manages 16.06 GPixel/s and 64.26 GTexel/s. The W7500's memory subsystem uses GDDR6 at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective), whereas the 560X uses GDDR5 at 1470 MHz (5.9 Gbps effective).

Process technology differences are stark: 6 nm versus 14 nm, with transistor counts of 13,300 million versus 3,000 million. Despite the massive transistor count increase, the W7500's TDP is 70 W, slightly lower than the 560X's 75 W. The W7500 is a single-slot card with no power connectors and a suggested PSU of 250 W, while the 560X is an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with no power connectors and no suggested PSU listed.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear hierarchy. For any workload measured by OpenCL or Vulkan, the AMD Radeon PRO W7500 is the definitive choice. Its 502.4% OpenCL lead and 308.1% Vulkan lead over the 560X are not incremental improvements — they represent a completely different performance class. The W7500 also offers 8 GB of GDDR6 versus 4 GB of GDDR5, ray-tracing support, and a newer API feature set (DirectX 12 Ultimate, Vulkan 1.4). The 560X's only advantages are its IGP form factor for portable devices and its lower power draw of 75 W versus 70 W — though the W7500 actually consumes slightly less power despite being a discrete card.

Users running modern professional applications with ray tracing, high-resolution textures, or compute-heavy workloads should select the W7500 without hesitation. The 560X remains relevant only for legacy Mac-based systems (it belongs to the Radeon Pro Mac 500X Series) where the IGP form factor is required and the workload is limited to basic 2D or light 3D tasks. The 560X's percentile ranking of 57 versus the W7500's 59 shows both are mid-pack overall, but the W7500's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell (0% delta) and AMD Radeon Pro 5600M (0.4% ahead), placing it in far more capable company than the 560X, whose nearest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 Ti (0.1% delta).

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon PRO W7500 | AMD Radeon Pro 560X |

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

| Architecture | RDNA 3.0 | GCN 4.0 |

| Process Node | 6 nm (TSMC) | 14 nm (GlobalFoundries) |

| Transistors | 13,300 million | 3,000 million |

| Die Size | 204 mm² | 123 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 65.2M / mm² | 24.4M / mm² |

| Memory Size | 8 GB GDDR6 | 4 GB GDDR5 |

| Memory Clock | 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) | 1470 MHz (5.9 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Bandwidth | 256.0 GB/s | 94.08 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 1792 | 1024 |

| TMUs | 112 | 64 |

| ROPs | 64 | 16 |

| RT Cores | 28 | None |

| FP32 Performance | 12.19 TFLOPS | 2.056 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 24.37 TFLOPS (2:1) | 2.056 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| Pixel Rate | 108.8 GPixel/s | 16.06 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 190.4 GTexel/s | 64.26 GTexel/s |

| TDP | 70 W | 75 W |

| Slot Width | Single-slot | IGP |

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

| Display Outputs | 4x DisplayPort 2.1 | Portable Device Dependent |

| DirectX Support | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12 (12_0) |

| Vulkan Support | 1.4 | 1.3 |

| Production Status | Active | End-of-life |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark data includes two tests, both won decisively by the AMD Radeon PRO W7500. In Geekbench OpenCL, the W7500 scores 58213 against the 560X's 9663, producing a delta of 502.4%. This is the largest performance differential in the entire comparison. The W7500's FP32 throughput of 12.19 TFLOPS versus 2.056 TFLOPS for the 560X explains much of this gap, as does the memory bandwidth advantage of 256.0 GB/s versus 94.08 GB/s.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the W7500 scores 68634 versus 16819 for the 560X, a 308.1% advantage. The W7500 supports Vulkan 1.4, while the 560X is limited to Vulkan 1.3. The W7500's 28 ray-tracing cores and modern RDNA 3.0 architecture provide additional compute paths that the GCN 4.0-based 560X simply cannot access. The Vulkan delta, while smaller than OpenCL, still represents a massive performance gap that would be evident in any modern graphics or compute workload.

The W7500's average benchmark score of 16415 places it 0.3% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT and 0.4% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro 5600M in its nearest rival list. The 560X's average of 15082 sits 0.1% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 Ti and 0.6% behind the AMD Radeon RX 7600. These nearest-rival deltas contextualize each card's standing: the W7500 competes with high-end consumer and workstation GPUs from 2020-2024, while the 560X trades blows with entry-level cards from a similar era.

Additional benchmark data for the W7500 shows passmark scores of 13368 in G3D, 5910 in GPU compute, 1174 in G2D, and legacy DirectX tests of 200 (DX9), 125 (DX11), 65 (DX10), and 46 (DX12). The 560X has no passmark data in the fact pack, so direct comparisons on those tests are not possible.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon PRO W7500 wins decisively in every measured benchmark category. Its 502.4% OpenCL advantage makes it the clear choice for compute-heavy professional workloads such as rendering, simulation, and data processing. The 308.1% Vulkan advantage extends this dominance to modern graphics APIs, particularly relevant for real-time visualization and gaming-adjacent professional tools. The W7500's 8 GB GDDR6 memory with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth provides 2.7 times the bandwidth of the 560X, enabling higher-resolution textures and larger datasets without swapping.

The W7500 also wins on architectural features: 28 ray-tracing cores enable hardware-accelerated ray tracing, DirectX 12 Ultimate support provides the latest feature level, and Vulkan 1.4 offers newer extensions and optimizations. Its PCIe 4.0 x8 interface doubles the bandwidth of the 560X's PCIe 3.0 x8 connection, reducing data transfer bottlenecks. The W7500 achieves all this with a 70 W TDP — 5 W lower than the 560X — and fits in a single-slot form factor with four DisplayPort 2.1 outputs.

The AMD Radeon Pro 560X wins in exactly one practical scenario: portable devices requiring an integrated graphics processor. As an IGP with no power connectors and no dimensions listed, it is designed for Mac laptops where the W7500's 216 mm length and single-slot discrete form factor would not fit. The 560X also supports OpenGL 4.6, matching the W7500, so legacy OpenGL applications will run on both. For users constrained to the Mac 500X Series platform, the 560X remains the only option of the two. However, for anyone with the ability to install a discrete card, the W7500's benchmark data leaves no argument — it wins 2 out of 2 head-to-head tests, with the 560X recording zero wins.