AMD Radeon Pro 570 vs AMD Radeon RX 5300M Comparison

The AMD Radeon RX 5300M and AMD Radeon Pro 570 represent two distinct approaches to mobile graphics from the same manufacturer, separated by two generations of architecture and designed for different ecosystems. The RX 5300M, built on the 7 nm process with RDNA 1.0 architecture, targets Windows gaming laptops, while the Pro 570, using the 14 nm GCN 4.0 architecture, was designed for Mac systems. The benchmark data shows a decisive victory for the newer RDNA part in the available OpenCL test, with a 31.9% performance delta, yet the older GCN card offers advantages in memory capacity and API breadth that may matter for specific professional workloads.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two GPUs is substantial. The AMD Radeon RX 5300M utilizes the Navi 14 chip fabricated on TSMC's 7 nm process, packing 6,400 million transistors into a 158 mm² die. This yields a transistor density of 40.5M per mm², a figure that highlights the efficiency of the newer manufacturing node. In contrast, the AMD Radeon Pro 570 uses the Ellesmere chip built on GlobalFoundries' 14 nm process, with 5,700 million transistors spread across a much larger 232 mm² die, resulting in a lower density of 24.6M per mm².

The core configurations differ significantly despite the RX 5300M having fewer shading units. The RX 5300M features 1,408 shading units, 88 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The Pro 570, meanwhile, provides 1,792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. This means the Pro 570 has roughly 27% more shading units and TMUs, yet the RX 5300M achieves higher raw throughput in certain metrics. The RX 5300M delivers 4.069 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 8.138 TFLOPS of FP16 via a 2:1 ratio, while the Pro 570 produces 3.960 TFLOPS of FP32 and the same 3.960 TFLOPS of FP16 at a 1:1 ratio. The newer architecture's ability to double FP16 throughput represents a significant computational advantage for workloads that can utilize it.

Clock speeds tell a similar story of architectural efficiency. The RX 5300M has a base clock of 1000 MHz, a boost clock of 1445 MHz, and a game clock of 1181 MHz. The Pro 570 matches the 1000 MHz base clock but only reaches 1105 MHz boost, reflecting the older GCN design's limitations on the same process node. Memory subsystems also diverge: the RX 5300M uses 3 GB of GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus, delivering 168.0 GB/s of bandwidth, while the Pro 570 uses 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, providing 217.0 GB/s. The Pro 570's wider bus and larger capacity give it a bandwidth advantage of 49 GB/s, which can be critical for texture-heavy workloads.

Power consumption and interface compatibility further separate these parts. The RX 5300M has a TDP of 85 W and uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface, while the Pro 570 draws 150 W and operates on PCIe 3.0 x16. Both lack external power connectors and use portable device dependent display outputs. The RX 5300M supports DirectX 12_1, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the Pro 570 supports DirectX 12_0, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The newer part's higher DirectX feature level and Vulkan version represent incremental API advancements.

Where Each One Wins

Based solely on the benchmark data provided, the AMD Radeon RX 5300M wins the only head-to-head comparison available. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the RX 5300M scores 36,529 against the Pro 570's 27,702, a delta of 31.9% in favor of the newer card. This single data point suggests the RX 5300M holds a clear advantage in general-purpose compute workloads as measured by OpenCL.

However, the Pro 570's benchmark profile includes additional tests that the RX 5300M lacks. The Pro 570 achieves 39,945 in Geekbench Metal and 31,974 in Geekbench Vulkan, scores that indicate strong performance in Apple's Metal API and cross-platform Vulkan. While no direct comparison exists for these tests against the RX 5300M, the Pro 570's average benchmark score of 33,207 across three tests shows it is competitive in absolute terms. The RX 5300M's single OpenCL score of 36,529 gives it an average of 36,529, which is 10% higher than the Pro 570's multi-test average.

The memory configuration favors the Pro 570 for specific use cases. With 4 GB of VRAM versus 3 GB, the Pro 570 can hold larger datasets and textures in local memory, which is advantageous for professional applications like 3D rendering or video editing that require substantial framebuffer capacity. The Pro 570's 217.0 GB/s bandwidth versus 168.0 GB/s also benefits bandwidth-sensitive operations. Conversely, the RX 5300M's lower TDP of 85 W versus 150 W makes it more suitable for thinner and lighter laptops where thermal headroom is limited.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Geekbench OpenCL result is the only direct comparison available, and it is decisive. The AMD Radeon RX 5300M scores 36,529, while the AMD Radeon Pro 570 scores 27,702. This represents a 31.9% advantage for the RX 5300M, a substantial margin that reflects the architectural leap from GCN 4.0 to RDNA 1.0. The newer design achieves this victory despite having 384 fewer shading units and 24 fewer TMUs, demonstrating the efficiency gains from the 7 nm process and redesigned compute units.

The RX 5300M's win in OpenCL is particularly notable given its lower memory bandwidth. The Pro 570's 217.0 GB/s should theoretically help in memory-bound OpenCL workloads, yet the RX 5300M's 168.0 GB/s still produces a significantly higher score. This indicates that the RDNA 1.0 architecture's memory compression and scheduling improvements overcome the raw bandwidth deficit. Similarly, the RX 5300M's lower pixel rate of 46.24 GPixel/s versus the Pro 570's 35.36 GPixel/s shows that the newer part achieves higher fill rates despite fewer ROPs, likely due to more efficient rasterization.

Context from nearest rivals reinforces the RX 5300M's standing. Its OpenCL score of 36,529 places it within 0% of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN X (36,530), 0.7% ahead of the NVIDIA T1000 (36,289), and 1.9% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro Duo (35,860). It trails the AMD Radeon PRO W6400 (37,157) by 1.7%. The Pro 570's average score of 33,207 sits within 0.1% of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Mobile (33,170) and the NVIDIA T550 Mobile (33,161), 0.7% ahead of the NVIDIA P104-100 (32,982), and 1.1% ahead of the NVIDIA T600 Mobile (32,849). These proximity values show the RX 5300M competing with desktop-class parts from the previous generation, while the Pro 570 aligns with modern mobile midrange GPUs.

The Verdict

The data clearly favors the AMD Radeon RX 5300M for OpenCL-based compute workloads. Its 31.9% advantage over the Pro 570 in the sole head-to-head benchmark is substantial and reflects the fundamental architectural improvements of RDNA 1.0 over GCN 4.0. Users seeking maximum compute performance in Windows environments should choose the RX 5300M, as it delivers higher FP32 throughput (4.069 TFLOPS vs 3.960 TFLOPS), double the FP16 throughput (8.138 TFLOPS vs 3.960 TFLOPS), and a higher pixel rate (46.24 GPixel/s vs 35.36 GPixel/s) while consuming nearly half the power (85 W vs 150 W).

The AMD Radeon Pro 570 remains relevant for specific professional scenarios, particularly in macOS environments where Metal performance is paramount. Its Geekbench Metal score of 39,945 is the highest single test result across both cards, suggesting that Apple's API optimizations favor the GCN architecture. The Pro 570 also offers 4 GB of memory versus 3 GB and higher bandwidth (217.0 GB/s vs 168.0 GB/s), which supports larger working sets. However, its lower Vulkan score of 31,974 compared to its Metal score indicates platform-specific strengths.

For users prioritizing raw OpenCL performance, power efficiency, and modern API support, the RX 5300M is the clear choice. For those locked into macOS ecosystems or requiring larger memory capacity, the Pro 570 provides a viable alternative despite its older architecture. The percentile rankings confirm this split: the RX 5300M sits at the 80th percentile of all GPUs, while the Pro 570 sits at the 78th percentile. Both are end-of-life products, but the RX 5300M's newer design gives it a longer useful lifespan in compute-heavy tasks.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher Geekbench OpenCL score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 5300M scores 36,529, which is 31.9% higher than the AMD Radeon Pro 570's score of 27,702.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon Pro 570 have any benchmark advantage?

A: The Pro 570 has a Geekbench Metal score of 39,945 and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 31,974, but no direct comparison is available against the RX 5300M for these tests.

Q: How do these GPUs compare in memory specifications?

A: The RX 5300M has 3 GB of GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus with 168.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the Pro 570 has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 217.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What are the power consumption differences?

A: The RX 5300M has a TDP of 85 W, while the Pro 570 has a TDP of 150 W, making the RX 5300M more power-efficient.

Q: Which GPU has higher compute throughput?

A: The RX 5300M delivers 4.069 TFLOPS FP32 and 8.138 TFLOPS FP16, while the Pro 570 delivers 3.960 TFLOPS for both FP32 and FP16.

Q: How do these GPUs rank against all other GPUs?

A: The RX 5300M is at the 80th percentile, while the Pro 570 is at the 78th percentile, indicating the RX 5300M performs better relative to the broader GPU landscape.