AMD Radeon Pro 560X vs AMD Radeon Vega 11 Comparison

AMD Radeon Pro 560X and AMD Radeon Vega 11 are both end-of-life AMD graphics solutions, but they target fundamentally different segments: one is a discrete mobile GPU, the other an integrated processor graphics unit. Benchmark data shows the Pro 560X takes a 2-1 win in the head-to-head tests, yet the Vega 11 delivers a decisive victory in one key workload. The Pro 560X edges ahead in overall average score (15,082 vs. 14,352, a 5.1% gap) and sits at the 57th percentile vs. the Vega 11's 56th, but the per-test results reveal a more nuanced picture than the overall average suggests.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most dramatic single-test margin belongs to the AMD Radeon Pro 560X in Geekbench Vulkan. Here the Pro 560X scores 16,819 against the Vega 11's 12,273, a commanding 37% lead. This is the largest delta in the entire comparison and indicates a substantial advantage in Vulkan-based compute and rendering workloads. The Pro 560X's discrete memory subsystem and higher shading unit count (1024 vs. 704) likely drive this gap, though the data does not directly confirm causality — only the score difference is observed.

The Pro 560X also wins Geekbench Metal, posting 18,763 versus 17,392. That 7.9% margin is meaningful but far narrower than the Vulkan gap. Both GPUs support Metal, and the Pro 560X's advantage here suggests it handles Apple's graphics API more efficiently, though the Vega 11 remains competitive within striking distance. For Metal-centric applications, the Pro 560X is clearly ahead, but not overwhelmingly so.

The AMD Radeon Vega 11's sole victory comes in Geekbench OpenCL, where it scores 13,392 against the Pro 560X's 9,663. That is a 27.8% reversal — the largest percentage swing in either direction. This is a significant outlier: the Vega 11 wins OpenCL by nearly 28%, while the Pro 560X wins Vulkan by 37% and Metal by 7.9%. The OpenCL result is particularly striking because the Pro 560X has higher FP32 throughput (2.056 TFLOPS vs. 1.971 TFLOPS), yet the Vega 11 still dominates in this API. The Vega 11's 2:1 FP16 ratio (3.942 TFLOPS vs. the Pro 560X's 1:1 ratio) may contribute, as OpenCL workloads can leverage half-precision paths, but the data does not explicitly confirm this mechanism.

Nearest-rival context reinforces the split. The Pro 560X's average score of 15,082 places it within 0.1% of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 Ti (15,063) and 0.6% behind the AMD Radeon RX 7600 (15,171). The Vega 11's 14,352 average sits 0.1% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN (14,373) and 0.2% behind the AMD Radeon RX Vega 11 (14,385). In raw average terms, the Pro 560X is about 5% faster than the Vega 11, but that aggregate hides the fact that the Vega 11 is the better OpenCL performer by a wide margin. The two GPUs are closely matched overall, with the Pro 560X's wins coming in Metal and Vulkan while the Vega 11 counters in OpenCL.

The Verdict

From the benchmark data alone, the AMD Radeon Pro 560X is the better-rounded GPU for most users. It wins two of three tests, holds a higher average score (15,082 vs. 14,352), and achieves a higher percentile ranking (57 vs. 56). Its Vulkan lead of 37% is the single largest advantage in the comparison, making it the clear choice for Vulkan-based games or compute applications. The Metal win (7.9%) further solidifies its position for Apple ecosystem workloads, where Metal is the primary graphics API.

However, the AMD Radeon Vega 11 is the definitive pick for OpenCL-heavy workloads. Its 27.8% OpenCL advantage over the Pro 560X is substantial and cannot be ignored. If a user's primary applications rely on OpenCL — common in certain scientific, video editing, or rendering pipelines — the Vega 11 delivers significantly better performance despite its lower average score. The Vega 11 also has a much lower TDP (15 W vs. 75 W), though power consumption is not a benchmark score and should be weighed separately.

The data suggests a clear rule: choose the Pro 560X for Metal and Vulkan workloads, choose the Vega 11 for OpenCL. For mixed usage, the Pro 560X's 2-1 win record and higher average make it the safer default. The Vega 11's OpenCL dominance is real but narrow in scope — it does not translate to wins in the other two APIs. Neither GPU is a universal winner, but the Pro 560X covers more ground.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins the most benchmarks?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 560X wins 2 of 3 head-to-head tests (Geekbench Metal and Geekbench Vulkan), while the AMD Radeon Vega 11 wins 1 (Geekbench OpenCL).

Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two GPUs?

A: In Geekbench Vulkan, the Pro 560X leads by 37% (16,819 vs. 12,273). The second-largest gap is the Vega 11's 27.8% OpenCL win (13,392 vs. 9,663).

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Pro 560X has an average benchmark score of 15,082, while the Vega 11 averages 14,352. The Pro 560X is about 5.1% higher, and it also ranks slightly better at the 57th percentile vs. the Vega 11's 56th.

Q: Which GPU is better for Metal-based applications?

A: The Pro 560X scores 18,763 in Geekbench Metal, a 7.9% advantage over the Vega 11's 17,392. This makes the Pro 560X the stronger choice for Metal workloads.

Q: Is the Vega 11 competitive in any specific API?

A: Yes, the Vega 11 wins Geekbench OpenCL by a wide margin: 13,392 vs. 9,663, a 27.8% lead. This is its only head-to-head victory.

Q: How do these GPUs compare to their nearest rivals?

A: The Pro 560X's average score is 0.1% above the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 Ti and 0.6% below the AMD Radeon RX 7600. The Vega 11's average is 0.1% below the NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN and 0.2% below the AMD Radeon RX Vega 11.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every core specification. The Pro 560X uses a Polaris 21 chip with 3,000 million transistors on a 123 mm² die, while the Vega 11 uses a Picasso chip with 4,940 million transistors on a 210 mm² die. Process nodes differ: the Pro 560X is built on 14 nm, the Vega 11 on 12 nm, both by GlobalFoundries. Transistor density is nearly identical (24.4M/mm² vs. 23.5M/mm²), despite the node difference.

Memory is the starkest contrast. The Pro 560X has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 94.08 GB/s bandwidth and a 1470 MHz memory clock (5.9 Gbps effective). The Vega 11 uses system-shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth and no dedicated memory clock. This gives the Pro 560X a fixed, dedicated memory pool, while the Vega 11's performance depends entirely on the host system's RAM.

Compute resources differ significantly. The Pro 560X has 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The Vega 11 has 704 shading units, 44 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. Pixel rates follow: 16.06 GPixel/s for the Pro 560X vs. 11.20 GPixel/s for the Vega 11. Texture rates are closer: 64.26 GTexel/s vs. 61.60 GTexel/s. FP32 is similar (2.056 vs. 1.971 TFLOPS), but FP16 diverges sharply — the Pro 560X runs 1:1 at 2.056 TFLOPS, while the Vega 11 runs 2:1 at 3.942 TFLOPS.

Power and interface also differ. The Pro 560X is rated at 75 W TDP with PCIe 3.0 x8 and portable-device-dependent display outputs. The Vega 11 is rated at 15 W TDP with an IGP bus interface and motherboard-dependent outputs. Both use no power connectors and are IGP slot width. Release dates differ: the Pro 560X launched 2018-07-15, the Vega 11 on 2019-09-29.

Architecture Differences

The Pro 560X is built on GCN 4.0 architecture, while the Vega 11 uses GCN 5.0. This is a generational architectural shift, though both are GCN-based. The Vega 11 belongs to the "Vega IGP (Picasso)" generation and has a predecessor (GCN 3.0 IGP) and successor (Vega II IGP), while the Pro 560X is in the "Radeon Pro Mac (500X Series)" generation with no listed predecessor or successor.

DirectX support differs: the Pro 560X supports DirectX 12 (12_0), while the Vega 11 supports DirectX 12 (12_1). Both offer OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.3. The FP16 capability is a notable architectural difference — the Pro 560X processes FP16 at 1:1 ratio (2.056 TFLOPS), while the Vega 11 processes at 2:1 ratio (3.942 TFLOPS), effectively doubling half-precision throughput. This architectural choice likely explains the Vega 11's OpenCL advantage, as OpenCL can utilize FP16 paths.

The Vega 11's larger die (210 mm² vs. 123 mm²) and higher transistor count (4,940M vs. 3,000M) reflect its integrated nature — it shares the die with CPU cores in a Picasso APU. The Pro 560X is a discrete GPU with its own dedicated memory and bus interface. Neither GPU has ray tracing or tensor cores. The Vega 11's base clock is listed at 300 MHz with a 1400 MHz boost, while the Pro 560X has no base or boost clock listed, only memory clocks.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon Pro 560X wins in Vulkan and Metal scenarios. Its 37% Vulkan lead makes it the clear choice for Vulkan-based games and compute. Its 7.9% Metal advantage covers Apple ecosystem applications — MacOS software, Metal-accelerated video editing, and 3D rendering. The Pro 560X also holds a 5.1% average score advantage and a higher percentile ranking (57 vs. 56), making it the better all-around performer for mixed workloads. Its 4 GB dedicated GDDR5 with 94.08 GB/s bandwidth provides consistent memory performance independent of system RAM.

The AMD Radeon Vega 11 wins specifically in OpenCL workloads. Its 27.8% OpenCL lead makes it the stronger pick for OpenCL-based scientific computing, certain media encoders, and legacy compute pipelines. The Vega 11's 2:1 FP16 throughput (3.942 TFLOPS) gives it an edge in half-precision compute, which is leveraged by some OpenCL applications. Its 15 W TDP is dramatically lower than the Pro 560X's 75 W, though this is a power specification, not a benchmark result. For users running OpenCL-heavy software, the Vega 11's single-test dominance outweighs its losses in Metal and Vulkan. For everything else, the Pro 560X is the data-supported recommendation.