AMD Radeon Pro 560X vs AMD Radeon RX 9060 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the AMD Radeon RX 9060 wins every head-to-head comparison, leaving the AMD Radeon Pro 560X with zero victories across the shared tests. This is not a close contest; it is a generational gap expressed in performance deltas. The RX 9060 dominates in compute workloads, as evidenced by its Geekbench OpenCL score of 88,183 against the Pro 560X’s 9,663 — a staggering 812.6% advantage. For graphics API workloads, the RX 9060 also leads decisively in Geekbench Vulkan, scoring 39,476 versus 16,819, a 134.7% margin.

The use-case split is therefore stark. The RX 9060 is the clear choice for any modern workload that leverages DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), Vulkan 1.4, or heavy compute via OpenCL. Its 21.43 TFLOPS FP32 performance and 288.0 GB/s memory bandwidth make it suited for contemporary gaming and GPU-accelerated tasks. In contrast, the Pro 560X, with its GCN 4.0 architecture and 2.056 TFLOPS FP32, is relegated to legacy or low-intensity applications. The data shows the Pro 560X’s only benchmark win is in Geekbench Metal (18,763), a test not run on the RX 9060, indicating its niche is Apple ecosystem compatibility rather than raw performance. For any task where both cards are eligible, the RX 9060 is the unequivocal winner.

Architecture Differences

The architectural chasm between these two GPUs is vast, spanning process technology, core design, and feature support. The RX 9060 is built on TSMC’s 4 nm process with 29,700 million transistors on a 199 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 149.2 million per mm². The Pro 560X, by contrast, uses GlobalFoundries’ 14 nm process with only 3,000 million transistors on a 123 mm² die, resulting in a density of 24.4 million per mm². This is a 9.9x difference in transistor count and a 6.1x difference in density, explaining the massive performance disparity.

Core configurations tell a similar story. The RX 9060 features 1,792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, alongside 28 dedicated ray tracing cores. The Pro 560X has 1,024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and just 16 ROPs, with no ray tracing hardware. The RX 9060’s architecture is RDNA 4.0 (Navi 44), while the Pro 560X uses GCN 4.0 (Polaris 21). This means the RX 9060 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, whereas the Pro 560X is limited to DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3. Both support OpenGL 4.6. The RX 9060 also has a 1:1 FP16 to FP32 ratio at 21.43 TFLOPS each, while the Pro 560X offers 2.056 TFLOPS for both. Memory technology differs as well: the RX 9060 uses 8 GB GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the Pro 560X has 4 GB GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 94.08 GB/s bandwidth.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Geekbench OpenCL test is the single largest differentiator. The RX 9060 scores 88,183, which is 812.6% higher than the Pro 560X’s 9,663. This is not a marginal improvement; it is an order-of-magnitude leap in compute throughput. The RX 9060’s 21.43 TFLOPS FP32 and 29,700 million transistors simply overwhelm the Pro 560X’s 2.056 TFLOPS and 3,000 million transistors. In practical terms, any OpenCL-based rendering, simulation, or data processing workload will finish in a fraction of the time on the RX 9060.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the RX 9060 again wins, scoring 39,476 versus 16,819, a 134.7% delta. While the percentage is smaller than OpenCL, the absolute gap of 22,657 points is substantial. This indicates the RX 9060’s RDNA 4.0 architecture handles modern graphics APIs far more efficiently than the GCN 4.0-based Pro 560X. The RX 9060’s 28 ray tracing cores and DirectX 12 Ultimate support likely contribute to this advantage, even in a Vulkan compute scenario. The Pro 560X’s highest score across any test is its Geekbench Metal result of 18,763, but since the RX 9060 lacks a Metal result, this cannot be compared directly. For all shared metrics, the RX 9060 holds a 2-0 win record with an average delta of 473.65% across the two comparable tests.

FAQ

Q: Is the RX 9060 always faster than the Pro 560X?

A: In all shared benchmark tests, yes. The RX 9060 wins Geekbench OpenCL by 812.6% and Geekbench Vulkan by 134.7%. The Pro 560X has no wins in head-to-head comparisons.

Q: Which GPU has better compute performance?

A: The RX 9060. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 88,183 is 812.6% higher than the Pro 560X’s 9,663, driven by 21.43 TFLOPS FP32 versus 2.056 TFLOPS.

Q: Can the Pro 560X handle modern gaming APIs?

A: The Pro 560X supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3, but lacks ray tracing cores. The RX 9060 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4 with 28 ray tracing cores.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference?

A: The RX 9060 has 8 GB GDDR6 with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the Pro 560X has 4 GB GDDR5 with 94.08 GB/s bandwidth. Both use a 128-bit bus.

Q: Which GPU is more power-efficient?

A: The Pro 560X has a 75 W TDP versus the RX 9060’s 132 W, but the RX 9060 delivers far higher performance per watt given its 10x+ benchmark lead.

Q: Is the Pro 560X still relevant for any workload?

A: Its only unique benchmark is Geekbench Metal (18,763), which the RX 9060 does not run. For macOS-specific environments, the Pro 560X may be the only option, but for all other tasks, the data favors the RX 9060.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon RX 9060 | AMD Radeon Pro 560X |

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

| Process Node | 4 nm (TSMC) | 14 nm (GlobalFoundries) |

| Transistors | 29,700 million | 3,000 million |

| Die Size | 199 mm² | 123 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 149.2M / mm² | 24.4M / mm² |

| Architecture | RDNA 4.0 | GCN 4.0 |

| Generation | Navi IV (RX 9000) | Radeon Pro Mac (500X Series) |

| Shading Units | 1,792 | 1,024 |

| TMUs | 112 | 64 |

| ROPs | 64 | 16 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | 28 | None |

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

| Memory Clock | 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) | 1470 MHz (5.9 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Bandwidth | 288.0 GB/s | 94.08 GB/s |

| Pixel Rate | 191.4 GPixel/s | 16.06 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 334.9 GTexel/s | 64.26 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 21.43 TFLOPS | 2.056 TFLOPS |

| TDP | 132 W | 75 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | IGP |

| Power Connectors | 1x 8-pin | None |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 5.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |

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

| Vulkan Support | 1.4 | 1.3 |

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

| Release Date | 2025-08-04 | 2018-07-15 |

| Display Outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1b, 2x DisplayPort 2.1a | Portable Device Dependent |

The Verdict

The data dictates a single conclusion: the AMD Radeon RX 9060 is the superior GPU in every measurable way. It wins all head-to-head benchmarks, holds a 59th percentile ranking versus the Pro 560X’s 57th, and offers a 4x larger memory pool with 3x the bandwidth. The RX 9060’s nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti, scores an average of 16,129 versus the RX 9060’s 16,014 (a -0.7% delta), placing it in a completely different performance tier than the Pro 560X, which sits near the GeForce GTX 660 Ti (15,063, +0.1% delta) and even the integrated AMD Radeon 680M (15,270, -1.2% delta).

For buyers seeking a modern, active GPU for gaming, ray tracing, or compute workloads, the RX 9060 is the only rational choice. Its 28 ray tracing cores, DirectX 12 Ultimate support, and 21.43 TFLOPS FP32 performance make it future-proof for years. The Pro 560X, end-of-life since 2018, offers no competitive advantage outside Apple-specific Metal workloads. Its 75 W TDP is lower, but at the cost of 10x less compute performance. If you need raw speed, modern API support, and longevity, the RX 9060 wins outright. If you are constrained to a legacy Mac environment requiring Metal, the Pro 560X is the fallback, but the benchmark results show it is not a competitor on any level playing field. The verdict is not close: choose the RX 9060 for performance, and only consider the Pro 560X for niche platform compatibility.