AMD Radeon Pro 560X vs AMD Radeon RX 580 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded data leaves no ambiguity: the AMD Radeon RX 580 wins every single head-to-head benchmark against the AMD Radeon Pro 560X. The database shows three direct comparisons, all in Geekbench tests, and the RX 580 takes all three. The Pro 560X does not secure a single win in any measured test.

Breaking down by workload type, the RX 580 dominates in Metal, which is the primary graphics API for macOS and iOS ecosystems. Its score of 45235 versus the Pro 560X’s 18,763 represents a 58.5% margin. The gap is even larger in OpenCL, a cross-platform compute API often used in professional applications like video editing and 3D rendering. There the RX 580 posts 37,453 against the Pro 560X’s 9,663, a 74.2% shortfall for the smaller card. Vulkan, the modern low-overhead graphics and compute API, shows a similar story: RX 580 scores 45,173, while the Pro 560X manages only 16,819, a 62.8% difference.

The Pro 560X is an integrated graphics processor (IGP), designed for portable devices with a 75 W TDP and no external power connectors. Its niche is power efficiency and space savings, not raw performance. The RX 580, by contrast, is a dual-slot, 185 W add-in card with an 8-pin power connector and a recommended 450 W power supply. It is built for desktop towers where cooling and power delivery are not constraints.

In the broader database percentile rankings, the Pro 560X sits at the 57th percentile of all GPUs, while the RX 580 sits at the 53rd. That may seem counterintuitive given the head-to-head results, but the percentile reflects the entire mix of historical and current cards, including mobile and integrated parts. The Pro 560X’s average benchmark score is 15,082 across its three tests, while the RX 580 averages 12,928 across its eleven tests. The RX 580’s average is dragged down by a large set of Passmark sub-scores that measure legacy DirectX 9, 10, and 12 paths, many of which are much lower than its Geekbench results.

For users focused on Geekbench Metal, OpenCL, or Vulkan, the RX 580 is the clear choice. For those constrained to a portable device with no expansion slot, the Pro 560X is the only option of the two, but it will deliver roughly one quarter to one third of the compute performance.

Architecture Differences

Both cards are built on the same GCN 4.0 architecture and the same 14 nm GlobalFoundries process node, but they are not the same chip. The Pro 560X uses Polaris 21, a smaller and much simpler layout. The RX 580 uses Polaris 20, which is nearly double the size.

The transistor count tells the story: the Pro 560X packs 3,000 million transistors into a 123 mm² die, for a density of 24.4 million transistors per mm². The RX 580 carries 5,700 million transistors across a 232 mm² die, with a density of 24.6 million per mm². The process is almost identical in density, but the RX has substantially more silicon area.

The execution resources scale accordingly. The Pro 560X has 1,024 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 16 raster output units. The RX 580 has 2,304 shading units, 144 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. That means the RX has 2.25 times the shading units, 2.25 times the texture units, and twice the rasterization output. These are the hardware blocks that drive pixel fill and texture filtering, so the RX’s higher output rates are expected: its pixel rate is 42.88 GPixel/s versus the Pro’s 16.06 GPixel/s, and its texture rate is 193.0 GTexel/s versus 64.26 GTexel/s.

Memory configuration is another major split. The Pro 560X ships with 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 94.08 GB/s of bandwidth. The RX 580 has 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 256.0 GB/s. The RX has double the capacity, double the bus width, and nearly triple the bandwidth. This affects not just frame rates but also the ability to hold larger textures and buffers.

Clock speeds also differ, though the Pro 560X lacks recorded base and boost clocks in the database. The RX 580 runs at a base of 1257 MHz and a boost of 1340 MHz. The Pro 560X’s memory clock is listed at 1470 MHz (5.9 Gbps effective), while the RX 580’s memory runs at 2000 MHz (8 Gbps effective). The RX’s memory is faster both in absolute clock and in effective data rate.

Compute throughput is an order of magnitude apart: the Pro 560X delivers 2.056 TFLOPS of FP32 and FP16 (1:1), while the RX 580 delivers 6.175 TFLOPS of both, again at a 1:1 ratio. Neither card has ray tracing cores or tensor cores, as both predate those features and rely on traditional GCN shaders.

The bus interface also separates the two: the Pro 560X is PCIe 3.0 x8, while the RX 580 is PCIe 3.0 x16. That difference matters for data transfer to and from the CPU, particularly in compute workloads. The RX 580 also has variable display outputs (1x HDMI 2.0b and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a), while the Pro 560X’s outputs are portable-device dependent, meaning they vary by laptop model.

Power is the biggest functional distinction. The Pro 560X is a 75 W integrated part with no external power connector, while the RX 580 is a 185 W dual-slot card that requires a 1x 8-pin power connector and a 450 W power supply. The Pro 560X is given a 24 mm² die with a 75 W TDP, and the RX 580 is 232 mm² and 185 W, so the power draw per mm² is roughly comparable, but the absolute energy used is very different.

The Verdict

The data clearly favors the RX 580 for any user who can accommodate a desktop graphics card. In Metal, OpenCL, and Vulkan, the RX 580 is anywhere from 58.5% to 74.2% faster than the Pro 560X. Its 8 GB of VRAM and 256 GB/s bandwidth make it suited for modern game assets and compute buffers, and its 2.304 shading units provide the muscle for complex scenes.

The Pro 560X is not without a role. It is an IGP designed for Mac laptops, where the RX 580 cannot be installed. If the workload is on a portable device and the choice is between the Pro 560X and no discrete GPU at all, the Pro 560X is the one that fits. But the benchmark results make it clear that it is a low-power part, not a performance part. Its 96.11 GB/s bandwidth and 2.056 TFLOPS are sufficient for light 1080p gaming and basic compute, but they are an order of magnitude below the RX 580’s capabilities.

For a desktop user selecting between the two, the choice is the RX 580. It wins every benchmark, offers more VRAM, more bandwidth, and more compute units, and its only downside is the power requirement. The Pro 560X is for a specific form factor, not for a performance-seeking builder.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in Metal performance?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 580, with a Geekbench Metal score of 45,235 versus the Pro 560X’s 18,763, a 58.5% advantage.

Q: How much faster is the RX 580 in OpenCL compute?

A:** The RX 580 scores 37,453 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the Pro 560X scores 9,663, making the RX 580 74.2% faster.

Q: Can the Pro 560X be installed in a desktop PC?

A:** It is designed as an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with no display outputs of its own, so the output is portable-device dependent. It is not a desktop card.

Q: Does the RX 580 have more memory?

A:** Yes, the RX 580 has 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the Pro 560X has 4 GB on a 128-bit bus with 94.08 GB/s.

Q: What is the power requirement difference?

A:** The Pro 560X draws 75 W and has no power connector. The RX 580 draws 185 W, needs a 1x 8-pin power connector, and the database recommends a 450 W power supply.

Q: Do both support the same graphics APIs?

A:** Yes, both support DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. Neither has ray tracing or tensor cores.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The three recorded head-to-head tests all go to the RX 580. The closest margin is in Geekbench Metal, where the RX 580 scores 45,235 against the Pro 560X’s 18,763. That is a 58.5% lead, which is still a huge win. The delta is -58.5% for the Pro when compared to the RX.

The largest gap appears in Geekbench OpenCL. The RX 580 posts 37,453, and the Pro 560X only manages 9,663. The difference is 74.2%, meaning the Pro 560X delivers less than a quarter of the RX 580’s compute throughput in OpenCL tasks. This test is especially relevant for video rendering, physics simulation, and generic GPU compute.

The Vulkan test falls in between. The RX 580 scores 45,173, and the Pro 560X scores 16,819, a 62.8% deficit. Vulkan is the primary API for cross-platform games and emulators, and the RX 580’s advantage is decisive here as well.

The Pro 560X’s three benchmark averages give it an average score of 15,082, while the RX 580, across its broader set of eleven tests, averages 12,928. That does not indicate the Pro 560X is faster overall; it reflects the fact that the RX 580’s Passmark scores, which include DirectX 9, 10, and 11 tests, are low. For example, the RX 580 scores only 46 in Passmark DirectX 10 and 60 in DirectX 11. These older API tests are not representative of modern workloads, and they pull down the average. In the three tests that directly compare both cards, the RX 580 wins all.

The RX 580’s nearest rivals in the database are the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile (average 12,940, which is 0.1% higher) and the NVIDIA GTX 1660 SUPER (12,986, 0.4% higher). The Pro 560X’s nearest rivals are the GTX 660 Ti (15,063, 0.1% higher) and the RX 7600 (15,171, 0.6% higher). These comparisons show that the Pro 560X, despite losing to the RX 580, still sits in a higher average-score class than the RX 580’s class. That is due to the different test sets, not the Pro 560X being faster in the head-to-head.

The RX 580’s win streak is three for three. The Pro 560X has zero wins. In every single measured metric, the RX 580 is faster, and in most cases it is faster by a margin that would be perceptible in any demanding application. The only reason to pick the Pro 560X is if the chassis is a laptop with no external graphics slot. For any desktop or external GPU setup, the RX 580’s performance metrics are unambiguously superior.