AMD Radeon Pro 560X vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile Comparison

The AMD Radeon Pro 560X and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile represent two very different generations of mobile graphics, separated by nearly three years of silicon evolution. The recorded benchmark data shows a clear performance hierarchy, but the specifics of architecture, compute capabilities, and API support reveal a more nuanced picture than a simple score comparison. This analysis draws exclusively from the database entries for both parts.

FAQ

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in raw compute benchmarks?

A: In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile scores 57,915 versus 9,663 for the AMD Radeon Pro 560X, a delta of 83.3% in favor of NVIDIA. In Geekbench Vulkan, NVIDIA scores 55,812 against AMD's 16,819, a 69.9% advantage.

Q: Which GPU has the higher transistor count and what does that imply?

A: The NVIDIA chip (GA106) contains 12,000 million transistors on a 276 mm² die, while the AMD chip (Polaris 21) contains 3,000 million transistors on a 123 mm² die. The NVIDIA part has four times the transistor count, which supports its much higher shading unit count of 2,560 versus 1,024.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same modern graphics APIs?

A: No. The AMD Radeon Pro 560X supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, adding ray tracing and other next-generation features.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference between the two?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 560X uses 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 94.08 GB/s bandwidth. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile uses 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 192.0 GB/s bandwidth, roughly double the bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has a higher percentile ranking among all GPUs?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 560X sits at the 57th percentile, while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile sits at the 53rd percentile. Despite lower raw benchmark scores in the head-to-head tests, the AMD part ranks slightly higher in the overall distribution.

Q: What are the nearest rivals for each GPU according to average benchmark score?

A: For the AMD Radeon Pro 560X, the nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 Ti (delta 0.1%), AMD Radeon RX 7600 (delta -0.6%), NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM (delta -0.8%), and AMD Radeon 680M (delta -1.2%). For the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile, rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 580 (delta 0.1%), NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER (delta -0.4%), AMD Radeon 740M (delta 0.5%), and AMD FirePro W5100 (delta 0.7%).

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from fundamentally different design philosophies and manufacturing processes. The AMD Radeon Pro 560X is built on the GCN 4.0 architecture using the Polaris 21 chip, fabricated on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile uses the Ampere architecture with the GA106 chip, fabricated on an 8 nm process at Samsung. The process node difference alone explains much of the density gap: AMD's chip has a transistor density of 24.4 million transistors per mm², while NVIDIA's reaches 43.5 million per mm².

The sheer scale difference is striking. AMD packs 3,000 million transistors into a 123 mm² die, while NVIDIA fits 12,000 million transistors into a 276 mm² die. This fourfold transistor advantage translates directly into compute resources. The AMD part has 1,024 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 16 ROPs. The NVIDIA part has 2,560 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. NVIDIA also adds 20 ray tracing cores and 80 tensor cores, features entirely absent from the AMD chip.

Clock speeds and memory technology also diverge significantly. The AMD Radeon Pro 560X lists no base or boost clock in the database, but its memory runs at 1470 MHz with 5.9 Gbps effective throughput. The NVIDIA part has a base clock of 735 MHz and a boost clock of 1035 MHz, with memory at 1500 MHz and 12 Gbps effective. The NVIDIA memory interface is the same 128-bit width, but the GDDR6 technology and higher effective speed produce 192.0 GB/s of bandwidth versus 94.08 GB/s for the AMD part.

Both GPUs share a 75 W TDP, making them comparable in power envelope despite the massive difference in transistor count and compute resources. Both use the IGP slot width with no power connectors, and both have display outputs described as portable device dependent. The bus interface differs: AMD uses PCIe 3.0 x8 while NVIDIA uses PCIe 4.0 x16, which affects data transfer ceilings in compatible systems.

Compute performance metrics show the NVIDIA part's dominance. The AMD Radeon Pro 560X delivers 2.056 TFLOPS of FP32 and FP16 (1:1 ratio). The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile delivers 5.299 TFLOPS of FP32 and FP16 (also 1:1). Pixel rate for AMD is 16.06 GPixel/s versus 33.12 GPixel/s for NVIDIA. Texture rate is 64.26 GTexel/s versus 82.80 GTexel/s. Every throughput metric favors the NVIDIA chip by a substantial margin.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records two direct head-to-head comparisons between these GPUs, both in Geekbench compute tests. The results are lopsided. In Geekbench OpenCL, the AMD Radeon Pro 560X scores 9,663 while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile scores 57,915. That is a delta of 83.3% in NVIDIA's favor, meaning the NVIDIA part delivers roughly six times the OpenCL performance. This is not a marginal win; it is a generational gap made visible in a single metric.

The Geekbench Vulkan test tells a similar story, though with a slightly smaller margin. AMD scores 16,819, NVIDIA scores 55,812, and the delta is 69.9% in NVIDIA's favor. The Vulkan result is interesting because it shows the AMD part performing relatively better in Vulkan than in OpenCL. The AMD score of 16,819 in Vulkan is nearly double its OpenCL score of 9,663, while the NVIDIA part's Vulkan score of 55,812 is slightly below its OpenCL score of 57,915. This suggests the AMD architecture's Vulkan implementation extracts more relative performance from the hardware than its OpenCL path does.

The wins tally reflects this dominance: NVIDIA wins 2 head-to-head comparisons, AMD wins 0. There are no recorded tests in the head-to-head section for DirectX, ray tracing, or other workloads, so the comparison is limited to these two compute APIs. Still, the magnitude of the deltas makes the overall performance hierarchy unambiguous.

When considering the average benchmark scores and nearest rivals, a different perspective emerges. The AMD Radeon Pro 560X has an average benchmark score of 15,082 across its recorded tests, placing it at the 57th percentile. Its nearest rivals cluster tightly: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 Ti is 0.1% ahead, the AMD Radeon RX 7600 is 0.6% ahead, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM is 0.8% ahead, and the AMD Radeon 680M is 1.2% ahead. This tells us the AMD part is competitive with a specific performance tier, despite being outclassed by the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile.

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile has an average benchmark score of 12,940 across its broader test suite, which includes PassMark tests and 3DMark Steel Nomad. This places it at the 53rd percentile. Its nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon RX 580 (0.1% ahead), NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER (0.4% behind), AMD Radeon 740M (0.5% behind), and AMD FirePro W5100 (0.7% behind). The average score is lower than the AMD part's average, but the test suites are not identical, which explains the percentile inversion.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear winner for compute-heavy workloads: the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile. Its OpenCL score of 57,915 crushes the AMD Radeon Pro 560X's 9,663, and its Vulkan score of 55,812 similarly overwhelms the AMD's 16,819. If the use case involves OpenCL or Vulkan compute, the NVIDIA part is the only rational choice based on these measurements.

However, the percentile rankings complicate a blanket recommendation. The AMD Radeon Pro 560X sits at the 57th percentile, four points higher than the NVIDIA part's 53rd percentile. This indicates that within the broader GPU landscape, the AMD part holds its own against a wider set of competitors, even though it loses decisively to this specific NVIDIA chip. The AMD part's average benchmark score of 15,082 also exceeds the NVIDIA part's 12,940, though the tests contributing to those averages differ.

For users choosing between these two specific parts, the decision hinges on workload. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile offers ray tracing cores, tensor cores, DirectX 12 Ultimate support, and Vulkan 1.4, making it the more future-proof option for gaming and modern graphics APIs. The AMD Radeon Pro 560X offers GCN 4.0 architecture, DirectX 12 (12_0), and Vulkan 1.3, which covers most current titles but lacks the hardware features for ray tracing and DLSS-style acceleration.

The memory bandwidth difference reinforces the NVIDIA advantage. At 192.0 GB/s versus 94.08 GB/s, the NVIDIA part has exactly double the memory bandwidth, which matters for texture-heavy workloads and higher resolutions. Both have 4 GB of VRAM, so capacity is not a differentiator, but the GDDR6 versus GDDR5 technology gap is significant.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every specification category. The process node is 14 nm for AMD versus 8 nm for NVIDIA. The foundry is GlobalFoundries for AMD versus Samsung for NVIDIA. Transistor count is 3,000 million for AMD versus 12,000 million for NVIDIA. Die size is 123 mm² versus 276 mm². Transistor density is 24.4 million per mm² versus 43.5 million per mm².

Clock speeds differ in that the AMD part has no recorded base or boost clock, while the NVIDIA part has a base clock of 735 MHz and a boost clock of 1035 MHz. Memory clocks also differ: AMD at 1470 MHz with 5.9 Gbps effective, NVIDIA at 1500 MHz with 12 Gbps effective. Memory type is GDDR5 for AMD and GDDR6 for NVIDIA. Bandwidth is 94.08 GB/s versus 192.0 GB/s.

Shading units number 1,024 for AMD versus 2,560 for NVIDIA. TMUs are 64 versus 80. ROPs are 16 versus 32. The NVIDIA part has 20 ray tracing cores and 80 tensor cores; the AMD part has neither. Pixel rate is 16.06 GPixel/s versus 33.12 GPixel/s. Texture rate is 64.26 GTexel/s versus 82.80 GTexel/s. FP32 and FP16 performance is 2.056 TFLOPS versus 5.299 TFLOPS.

The bus interface is PCIe 3.0 x8 for AMD versus PCIe 4.0 x16 for NVIDIA. DirectX support is 12 (12_0) for AMD versus 12 Ultimate (12_2) for NVIDIA. Vulkan support is 1.3 for AMD versus 1.4 for NVIDIA. Both support OpenGL 4.6. The TDP is 75 W for both, slot width is IGP for both, and power connectors are none for both. The NVIDIA part has a predecessor listed as GeForce 20 Mobile, while the AMD part has no predecessor or successor listed.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile wins in every recorded head-to-head benchmark. In OpenCL compute, the 83.3% delta means workloads like physics simulations, video encoding, and machine learning inference will run dramatically faster on the NVIDIA chip. In Vulkan compute, the 69.9% delta means modern cross-platform applications and games that leverage Vulkan will see substantial performance gains. The NVIDIA part also has the hardware features for ray tracing and tensor-based operations, which gives it a functional advantage in any workload that utilizes those cores.

The AMD Radeon Pro 560X wins in the context of its nearest rivals. It sits at the 57th percentile, ahead of the NVIDIA part's 53rd percentile, and its average benchmark score of 15,082 exceeds the NVIDIA part's 12,940. The AMD part's closest competitor, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 Ti, is only 0.1% different in average score, meaning the AMD chip is competitive within its performance tier. For users who do not need the NVIDIA part's specific features, the AMD part remains a viable option in its class.

The NVIDIA part's higher average score in the head-to-head tests suggests it is the better choice for anyone who prioritizes raw compute throughput. The AMD part's higher percentile ranking suggests it slots into a broader ecosystem of comparable GPUs, making it easier to find drivers and optimizations for legacy software. The data does not record any test where the AMD part wins directly against the NVIDIA part, so any recommendation for the AMD chip must rely on the percentile and average score context rather than head-to-head results.

For gaming, the NVIDIA part's DirectX 12 Ultimate support and ray tracing cores give it access to features the AMD part cannot match. For professional compute, the NVIDIA part's tensor cores and higher FP32 throughput make it the clear choice. For users constrained to the AMD part's performance tier, the 57th percentile ranking indicates it performs admirably against a wide range of GPUs, even if it cannot match this particular NVIDIA mobile chip.