AMD Radeon Pro 5700 vs AMD Radeon RX 460 Comparison

The AMD Radeon Pro 5700 is the clear performance winner in every benchmark where the two cards appear together, but the RX 460 holds a razor-thin edge in average composite scores. The data shows a 3-0 sweep for the Pro 5700 in head-to-head tests, yet the RX 460’s average benchmark score of 18,373 slightly edges the Pro 5700’s 18,189. This paradox stems from the Pro 5700’s broader test suite, which includes legacy DirectX and 2D workloads that drag down its average. For raw compute and modern graphics APIs, the Pro 5700 is decisively ahead.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Pro 5700 dominates every shared test by a massive margin. In Geekbench Metal, the Pro 5700 scores 60,126 against the RX 460’s 17,065 — a 71.6% advantage. This is the largest gap between the two, reflecting the Pro 5700’s architectural superiority in Apple’s Metal framework. The Geekbench OpenCL result is similarly lopsided: 52,787 versus 17,855, a 66.2% lead for the Pro 5700. Vulkan shows the closest contest of the three, but the Pro 5700 still wins by 60.6%, scoring 51,289 against the RX 460’s 20,198.

The RX 460’s zero wins in head-to-head testing are telling. In every metric where both cards are measured, the Pro 5700 delivers more than double the performance. The delta percentages — negative for the RX 460 in all cases — confirm that the Pro 5700 is not marginally better but categorically faster. Even the RX 460’s best relative showing, Vulkan at -60.6%, still leaves it at less than half the Pro 5700’s score.

Looking at the broader benchmark landscape, the RX 460’s average of 18,373 places it within 0.1% of the Intel Arc A770M (18,383) and 0.9% ahead of the AMD FirePro D500 (18,533). The Pro 5700’s 18,189 average sits 0.2% behind the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Mobile (18,159) and 0.5% behind the RTX 2060 SUPER (18,093). This means the two cards occupy the same performance tier in aggregate, despite their divergent individual results. The RX 460’s higher average is driven by its limited test set, which lacks the low-scoring DirectX and 2D workloads that penalize the Pro 5700.

Architecture Differences

The architectural chasm between these two is vast. The RX 460 uses the Baffin chip built on GCN 4.0 architecture, fabricated on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It packs 3,000 million transistors into a 123 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 24.4 million per square millimeter. The Pro 5700, by contrast, uses the Navi 10 chip with RDNA 1.0 architecture, built on TSMC’s 7 nm process. It crams 10,300 million transistors into a 251 mm² die — a density of 41.0 million per square millimeter. That is 3.4 times more transistors in roughly double the die area.

The compute resources are equally disparate. The RX 460 has 896 shading units, 56 texture mapping units, and 16 render output units. The Pro 5700 more than doubles those numbers: 2,304 shading units, 144 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. This translates to a pixel rate of 86.40 GPixel/s for the Pro 5700 versus 19.20 GPixel/s for the RX 460. Texture rate tells the same story: 194.4 GTexel/s versus 67.20 GTexel/s. Floating-point performance is 6.221 TFLOPS for the Pro 5700, nearly three times the RX 460’s 2.150 TFLOPS.

Memory configuration is another major divider. The RX 460 uses 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, providing 112.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Pro 5700 has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 384.0 GB/s — more than triple the bandwidth. Clock speeds differ as well: the Pro 5700 runs at 1243 MHz base and 1350 MHz boost, while the RX 460 is at 1090 MHz base and 1200 MHz boost. The Pro 5700’s FP16 throughput is 12.44 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio, versus the RX 460’s 2.150 TFLOPS at 1:1. API support favors the Pro 5700 too: it hits DirectX 12_1 and Vulkan 1.4, while the RX 460 tops out at DirectX 12_0 and Vulkan 1.3.

The Verdict

The Pro 5700 is the definitive choice for any workload that stresses modern graphics APIs or compute. Its Geekbench scores are 3.5 to 4 times higher than the RX 460’s, and its memory bandwidth advantage alone — 384.0 GB/s versus 112.0 GB/s — makes it the pick for high-resolution textures or large datasets. The RX 460’s only statistical edge is its marginally higher average benchmark score, but this is an artifact of incomplete testing rather than genuine superiority. The RX 460 has no wins in any head-to-head test. For users who need a card for Metal, OpenCL, or Vulkan-intensive applications, the Pro 5700 is the only rational choice.

However, the RX 460 is not without merit. Its 75 W TDP is dramatically lower than the Pro 5700’s 130 W, and it requires no power connectors while the Pro 5700 also draws power from the motherboard in an IGP form factor. The RX 460 is a dual-slot card with physical display outputs (1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0b, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a), whereas the Pro 5700 has no display outputs at all. The RX 460 also has a longer physical footprint at 170 mm, but it is a self-contained card. The Pro 5700, being an IGP, is meant for embedded or Mac Pro use without any video output. The RX 460’s 2 GB frame buffer is limiting, but for legacy DirectX workloads or basic display tasks, it remains functional.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon RX 460 | AMD Radeon Pro 5700 |

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

| Chip | Baffin | Navi 10 |

| Architecture | GCN 4.0 | RDNA 1.0 |

| Process Node | 14 nm | 7 nm |

| Foundry | GlobalFoundries | TSMC |

| Transistors | 3,000 million | 10,300 million |

| Die Size | 123 mm² | 251 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 24.4M / mm² | 41.0M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1090 MHz | 1243 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1200 MHz | 1350 MHz |

| Memory Size | 2 GB | 8 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus | 128 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 112.0 GB/s | 384.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 896 | 2304 |

| TMUs | 56 | 144 |

| ROPs | 16 | 64 |

| Pixel Rate | 19.20 GPixel/s | 86.40 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 67.20 GTexel/s | 194.4 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 2.150 TFLOPS | 6.221 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 2.150 TFLOPS (1:1) | 12.44 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 75 W | 130 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | IGP |

| Suggested PSU | 250 W | 300 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0b, 1x DP 1.4a | No outputs |

| DirectX | 12 (12_0) | 12 (12_1) |

| Vulkan | 1.3 | 1.4 |

| Release Date | 2016-08-07 | 2020-08-03 |

FAQ

Q: Which card performs better in Geekbench Metal?

A: The Pro 5700 scores 60,126 versus the RX 460’s 17,065, a 71.6% lead for the Pro 5700.

Q: How does the memory bandwidth compare?

A: The Pro 5700 offers 384.0 GB/s over a 256-bit GDDR6 bus, while the RX 460 has 112.0 GB/s over a 128-bit GDDR5 bus.

Q: Are both cards still in production?

A: No, both are marked as end-of-life. The RX 460 was released on 2016-08-07, and the Pro 5700 on 2020-08-03.

Q: What is the power draw difference?

A: The RX 460 has a 75 W TDP with a suggested 250 W PSU, while the Pro 5700 has a 130 W TDP and a suggested 300 W PSU.

Q: Can either card output video?

A: Only the RX 460 has display outputs (1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0b, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a). The Pro 5700 has no outputs, as it is an IGP.

Q: Which card has higher FP16 performance?

A: The Pro 5700 reaches 12.44 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio, whereas the RX 460 is limited to 2.150 TFLOPS at 1:1.

Where Each One Wins

The Pro 5700 wins every compute and modern API scenario. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 52,787 versus 17,855 makes it the choice for GPGPU workloads, and its Vulkan advantage (51,289 versus 20,198) covers cross-platform games and applications. The 8 GB frame buffer and 384.0 GB/s bandwidth let it handle high-resolution textures and large compute buffers that would exhaust the RX 460’s 2 GB capacity. For any Metal-based macOS workload, the Pro 5700’s 60,126 score is in a different league entirely. The 12.44 TFLOPS FP16 output also favors it for AI inference or image processing that leverages half-precision.

The RX 460’s wins are narrower and more situational. Its 75 W TDP and lack of power connectors make it suitable for low-power or legacy systems where the Pro 5700’s 130 W draw is unacceptable. Its physical display outputs mean it can drive monitors directly, unlike the Pro 5700’s output-less design. In DirectX 9-era games or simple 2D desktop tasks, the RX 460’s shorter feature list is not a penalty — the Pro 5700’s extra horsepower goes unused. The RX 460’s PCIe 3.0 x8 interface is also easier to accommodate in older motherboards than the Pro 5700’s PCIe 4.0 x16, though both are backward compatible. For a user with a constrained power budget and a need for video output, the RX 460 remains functional. But for anyone prioritizing performance, the Pro 5700’s dominance in all three shared benchmarks leaves no contest.