AMD Radeon Pro 560X vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 690 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data splits cleanly between these two GPUs, with each taking one decisive victory in the recorded tests. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 690 dominates in OpenCL compute workloads, while the AMD Radeon Pro 560X counters with a narrow but real win in Vulkan graphics API performance.

For OpenCL, the GTX 690 posts a score of 17399 against the Pro 560X's 9663. That is an 80.1% advantage, which is a massive gap. Any workload that leans heavily on OpenCL compute, such as rendering, physics simulation, or general-purpose GPU compute, will strongly favor the NVIDIA card. The GTX 690's dual-GPU design gives it raw compute headroom that the single-chip AMD part simply cannot match in this API.

The Vulkan results tell a different story. The Pro 560X scores 16819, slightly ahead of the GTX 690's 16675. The delta is only -0.9% from the NVIDIA card's perspective, meaning the AMD part is about 1% faster. This is a much closer contest, and in real-world terms it is nearly a tie. However, the data records a win for AMD here, so Vulkan-based games or applications that use this API will favor the Radeon Pro 560X, albeit by a slim margin.

The overall average benchmark score puts the GTX 690 at 17037, while the Pro 560X sits at 15082. The percentiles reflect this: the GTX 690 lands in the 60th percentile of all GPUs, while the Pro 560X sits at the 57th percentile. So the NVIDIA card is slightly better positioned in the overall performance distribution, but both are mid-pack cards by modern standards.

The wins are split 1-1 in the head-to-head table. This is not a case where one card is universally faster. Instead, the choice depends entirely on which API and workload matters most to you. OpenCL users should look at the GTX 690. Vulkan users should give the edge to the Pro 560X, but expect near-parity.

Architecture Differences

These two cards come from different eras and different design philosophies. The GTX 690 uses the GK104 chip built on a 28 nm process at TSMC, with 3,540 million transistors packed into a 294 mm² die. The Pro 560X uses the Polaris 21 chip on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries, with 3,000 million transistors on a much smaller 123 mm² die. The transistor density tells the story: the AMD chip packs 24.4 million transistors per square millimeter, while the NVIDIA chip has 12.0 million per square millimeter. The newer process node gives AMD a significant density advantage.

The memory configurations differ substantially. The GTX 690 has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 192.3 GB/s of bandwidth. The Pro 560X has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, but only 94.08 GB/s of bandwidth. The NVIDIA card has more than double the memory bandwidth, which matters for high-resolution textures and compute workloads. The AMD card has twice the capacity, which helps with larger datasets that fit entirely in VRAM.

Compute resources are also asymmetric. The GTX 690 has 1536 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 32 raster output units. The Pro 560X has 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and only 16 ROPs. The pixel rate reflects this: the GTX 690 hits 32.61 GPixel/s versus 16.06 GPixel/s for the AMD card. Texture rate is similarly lopsided at 130.4 GTexel/s versus 64.26 GTexel/s. The GTX 690 is roughly twice as capable in both fillrate metrics.

FP32 compute follows the same pattern. The GTX 690 delivers 3.130 TFLOPS, while the Pro 560X delivers 2.056 TFLOPS. The AMD card does have a 1:1 FP16 ratio at 2.056 TFLOPS, but the GTX 690 does not list an FP16 figure, so direct comparison there is not possible from the data.

Power and physical design are stark contrasts. The GTX 690 is a dual-slot card with a 300 W TDP, requiring two 8-pin power connectors and a suggested 700 W power supply. It measures 279 mm in length, 111 mm in height, and 38 mm in width. The Pro 560X is an integrated GPU (IGP) with a 75 W TDP, no power connectors, and dimensions listed as "Portable Device Dependent." This is a card designed for laptops and compact Mac systems, not desktop towers.

API support differs in one notable way. The GTX 690 supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175. The Pro 560X supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The AMD card has a newer Vulkan implementation and full DirectX 12_0 support, while the NVIDIA card is limited to the 11_0 feature level under DX12.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The OpenCL result is the headline number in this comparison. The GTX 690 scores 17399, and the Pro 560X scores 9663. The delta is 80.1% in favor of NVIDIA. This is not a marginal difference; it is a near-doubling of performance. If you are running OpenCL-based compute tasks, the GTX 690 is the clear choice. The dual-GPU configuration of the NVIDIA card appears to scale well in this workload, whereas the single Polaris 21 chip in the AMD card struggles to keep pace.

The Vulkan benchmark is much closer. The GTX 690 scores 16675, and the Pro 560X scores 16819. The delta is -0.9% from the NVIDIA perspective, meaning AMD wins by less than one percent. In practical terms, this is a statistical tie. Both cards will deliver nearly identical frame rates in Vulkan titles. The Pro 560X's newer Vulkan 1.3 support likely contributes to its slight edge, but the margin is small enough that driver updates or test variance could flip the result.

Looking at the nearest rivals adds context. The GTX 690's closest competitors include the AMD Radeon HD 7970M at 17019 (0.1% behind), the AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT at 17083 (0.3% ahead), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 at 17208 (1% ahead). The GTX 690 sits comfortably in that group, trading blows with much newer cards. The Pro 560X's rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 Ti at 15063 (0.1% behind), the AMD Radeon RX 7600 at 15171 (0.6% ahead), and the AMD Radeon 680M at 15270 (1.2% ahead). The Pro 560X is near the bottom of its peer group, while the GTX 690 is near the top of its own.

The average benchmark score of 17037 for the GTX 690 versus 15082 for the Pro 560X means the NVIDIA card is roughly 13% faster overall. That gap is smaller than the OpenCL delta suggests, largely because the Vulkan result is so close. The overall picture is that the GTX 690 is the stronger card on average, but the Pro 560X holds its own in Vulkan-specific scenarios.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in OpenCL compute workloads?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 690 is dramatically faster, scoring 17399 versus 9663 for the AMD Radeon Pro 560X. This is an 80.1% advantage in the recorded OpenCL benchmark.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon Pro 560X win any benchmark?

A: Yes, the Pro 560X wins the Vulkan test with a score of 16819, narrowly beating the GTX 690's 16675. The margin is only 0.9%, but it is a recorded win for AMD.

Q: How do these cards compare in memory capacity and bandwidth?

A: The GTX 690 has 2 GB of GDDR5 with 192.3 GB/s bandwidth on a 256-bit bus. The Pro 560X has 4 GB of GDDR5 with 94.08 GB/s bandwidth on a 128-bit bus. The NVIDIA card has more than double the bandwidth, while the AMD card has double the capacity.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The GTX 690 has a 300 W TDP, requires two 8-pin power connectors, and a suggested 700 W power supply. The Pro 560X has a 75 W TDP, requires no power connectors, and has no suggested PSU listed.

Q: Which card supports newer API versions?

A: The Pro 560X supports Vulkan 1.3 and DirectX 12 (12_0). The GTX 690 supports Vulkan 1.2.175 and DirectX 12 (11_0). Both support OpenGL 4.6.

Q: Is the GTX 690 overall a faster card?

A: Yes, the GTX 690 has an average benchmark score of 17037 versus 15082 for the Pro 560X, and it sits in the 60th percentile of all GPUs compared to the 57th percentile for the AMD card.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split based on use case. If your priority is OpenCL compute performance, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 690 is the obvious pick. It delivers an 80.1% advantage in that specific benchmark, and its overall average score of 17037 places it in the 60th percentile, ahead of the Pro 560X's 57th percentile and 15082 average.

If your priority is Vulkan graphics, the AMD Radeon Pro 560X has the edge, but only barely. Its 16819 Vulkan score is 0.9% ahead of the GTX 690's 16675. That is within the margin of error for most real-world testing. The Pro 560X also offers 4 GB of VRAM versus 2 GB, which helps with larger textures and datasets, even though its bandwidth is much lower at 94.08 GB/s versus 192.3 GB/s.

For a desktop system with a strong power supply and room for a dual-slot card, the GTX 690 is the better performer on average. Its 3.130 TFLOPS of FP32 compute and 32.61 GPixel/s pixel rate are significantly higher than the Pro 560X's 2.056 TFLOPS and 16.06 GPixel/s. The 300 W TDP and 700 W PSU requirement are real costs, but the performance payoff is measurable.

For a laptop or compact system, the Pro 560X is the only realistic option. It is an integrated GPU with a 75 W TDP, no power connectors, and dimensions that are portable-device dependent. The GTX 690 cannot fit in that form factor at all. The Pro 560X also has newer API support with Vulkan 1.3 and DirectX 12_0, which may matter for software compatibility.

The launch MSRP for the GTX 690 was 999 USD. The Pro 560X has no listed launch MSRP. That price difference reflects the different markets these cards target. The GTX 690 was a flagship desktop part, while the Pro 560X is a mobile workstation component.

Choose the GTX 690 for raw compute power and higher average performance. Choose the Pro 560X for Vulkan workloads, newer API support, and a form factor that fits portable systems. The data does not support a single winner across all scenarios.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ on nearly every specification of note. The GTX 690 uses a 28 nm process at TSMC, while the Pro 560X uses a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. Transistor counts are close at 3,540 million versus 3,000 million, but die size differs dramatically: 294 mm² versus 123 mm². Transistor density is 12.0M per mm² for NVIDIA and 24.4M per mm² for AMD.

Memory size is 2 GB for the GTX 690 and 4 GB for the Pro 560X. Bus width is 256-bit versus 128-bit. Bandwidth is 192.3 GB/s versus 94.08 GB/s. The GTX 690 has 1536 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The Pro 560X has 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 16 ROPs.

Pixel rate is 32.61 GPixel/s versus 16.06 GPixel/s. Texture rate is 130.4 GTexel/s versus 64.26 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 3.130 TFLOPS versus 2.056 TFLOPS. The Pro 560X lists FP16 at 2.056 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, while the GTX 690 has no FP16 figure.

TDP is 300 W for the GTX 690 and 75 W for the Pro 560X. The GTX 690 is dual-slot with 2x 8-pin power connectors and a suggested 700 W PSU. The Pro 560X is an IGP with no power connectors and no suggested PSU. Bus interface is PCIe 3.0 x16 for NVIDIA and PCIe 3.0 x8 for AMD.

Display outputs are 3x DVI and 1x mini-DisplayPort 1.2 for the GTX 690, versus "Portable Device Dependent" for the Pro 560X. Vulkan support is 1.2.175 for NVIDIA and 1.3 for AMD. DirectX support is 12 (11_0) for NVIDIA and 12 (12_0) for AMD. Both support OpenGL 4.6.

Release dates are 2012-05-02 for the GTX 690 and 2018-07-15 for the Pro 560X. Both are end-of-life. The GTX 690's predecessor is the GeForce 500 series and its successor is the GeForce 700 series. The Pro 560X has no listed predecessor or successor.