AMD Radeon Pro 5700 vs AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT Comparison

The Verdict

The recorded data draws a clear line between these two Navi 10 parts. The AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT wins 9 of 10 head-to-head tests, with a decisive lead in every conventional graphics workload. The AMD Radeon Pro 5700 counters with a single, enormous victory in Geekbench OpenCL, where it outperforms the RX 5700 XT by 454.3%. That result is so anomalous that it fundamentally shapes the verdict.

For general GPU compute, rasterization, and DirectX workloads, the RX 5700 XT is the obvious pick. Its PassMark G3D score of 16277 versus 11583 for the Pro 5700 represents a 28.8% advantage, and its DirectX 11 result (116 vs 78) is 32.8% higher. The Pro 5700, however, appears to have a specialized OpenCL path that delivers exceptional performance in that specific API test. If the workload is OpenCL-heavy and the platform can accommodate the Pro 5700's integrated form factor (it is listed as IGP with no display outputs), then the Pro card is the data-driven choice.

The average benchmark scores complicate the picture. The Pro 5700 records an average of 18189 across all its tests, while the RX 5700 XT averages 16361. That places the Pro card 11.2% higher on average, despite losing most individual comparisons, because the OpenCL outlier (52787) inflates its aggregate. The RX 5700 XT sits at the 59th percentile of all GPUs, while the Pro 5700 sits at the 62nd percentile. Neither is a top-tier part by modern standards, but both remain competitive in their respective niches.

Architecture Differences

Both cards share the same fundamental silicon: Navi 10, built on TSMC's 7 nm process, with 10,300 million transistors on a 251 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 41.0M per mm². Both use the RDNA 1.0 architecture and support DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The architectural core is identical; the differences emerge in configuration and power delivery.

The RX 5700 XT ships with 2560 shading units, 160 texture mapping units, and 64 ROPs. The Pro 5700 has 2304 shading units, 144 TMUs, and the same 64 ROPs. That is a 10% reduction in shader count and an 11.1% reduction in TMUs for the Pro card. Neither has dedicated ray tracing or tensor cores, consistent with RDNA 1.0.

Clock speeds diverge substantially. The RX 5700 XT runs a base clock of 1605 MHz, a game clock of 1755 MHz, and a boost clock of 1905 MHz. The Pro 5700's base is 1243 MHz with a boost of 1350 MHz, which represents a 22.5% lower base and 29.1% lower boost. The Pro card has no game clock listed. This clock deficit explains most of the performance gap in rasterization tests.

Memory configuration is similar in capacity but differs in speed. Both use 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus. The RX 5700 XT runs its memory at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) for 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Pro 5700 runs at 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective) for 384.0 GB/s, a 14.3% bandwidth deficit.

Power and physical characteristics could not differ more. The RX 5700 XT is a dual-slot card, 272 mm long, 111 mm tall, and 36 mm wide, with a TDP of 225 W, requiring one 6-pin and one 8-pin connector and a 550 W suggested PSU. It outputs via 1x HDMI 2.0b and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a. The Pro 5700 is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with no slot width, no power connectors, no display outputs, a TDP of 130 W, and a 300 W suggested PSU. The Pro card is designed for integration into a system board, while the RX card is a standalone add-in board.

The RX 5700 XT launched on 2019-07-06 with a launch MSRP of 399 USD. The Pro 5700 launched on 2020-08-03, roughly 13 months later, with no launch MSRP recorded. Both are end-of-life products. The RX 5700 XT lists Vega as its predecessor and Navi II as its successor; the Pro 5700 has no recorded predecessor or successor.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Geekbench OpenCL result is the single most striking data point. The Pro 5700 scores 52787 against the RX 5700 XT's 9524, a 454.3% advantage. This is not a marginal edge; it is a factor of 5.5. For any workload that leverages OpenCL compute, the Pro 5700 is in a different class according to this measurement.

Every other comparison favors the RX 5700 XT. In Geekbench Metal, the RX card scores 74647 versus 60126, a 19.5% lead. In Geekbench Vulkan, the RX card scores 68310 versus 51289, a 24.9% lead. The RX 5700 XT also holds a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2134, a test that the Pro 5700 does not appear in the head-to-head list for.

PassMark results consistently favor the RX 5700 XT across all DirectX versions. DirectX 10: 97 vs 71, a 26.8% lead. DirectX 11: 116 vs 78, a 32.8% lead. DirectX 12: 64 vs 48, a 25% lead. DirectX 9: 226 vs 143, a 36.7% lead. The gap narrows for older APIs but never reverses.

In 2D and 3D performance, the RX 5700 XT leads again. PassMark G2D: 922 vs 805, a 12.7% edge. PassMark G3D: 16277 vs 11583, a 28.8% edge. The GPU compute test shows the RX card at 7650 versus 4961, a 35.2% advantage.

The win tally is 9 for the RX 5700 XT and 1 for the Pro 5700. That single win, however, is so large that it pulls the Pro card's average score above the RX card's average. The data shows that the Pro 5700 is a specialist: weak in graphics, exceptional in one compute API.

The nearest rival data places the Pro 5700 in close competition with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Mobile (average score 18159, delta 0.2%), the RTX 2060 SUPER (18093, delta 0.5%), the AMD Radeon RX 460 (18373, delta -1%), and the Intel Arc A770M (18383, delta -1.1%). The RX 5700 XT sits near the AMD Radeon Pro 5600M (16351, delta 0.1%), the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell (16408, delta -0.3%), the AMD Radeon PRO W7500 (16415, delta -0.3%), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D V2 (16504, delta -0.9%). The Pro 5700's average aligns with mobile and mid-range desktop parts, while the RX 5700 XT aligns with professional workstation and high-end desktop parts, despite its lower average.

FAQ

Q: Which card has better raw graphics performance?

A: The RX 5700 XT wins all graphics-oriented tests: PassMark G3D 16277 vs 11583, DirectX 11 116 vs 78, and Geekbench Metal 74647 vs 60126. Its higher shader count (2560 vs 2304) and boost clock (1905 MHz vs 1350 MHz) drive these results.

Q: Why does the Pro 5700 have a higher average benchmark score despite losing most tests?

A: The Pro 5700's Geekbench OpenCL score of 52787 versus 9524 for the RX 5700 XT is a 454.3% outlier. This single result raises the Pro card's average to 18189, above the RX card's 16361, even though the RX card wins 9 of 10 comparisons.

Q: Can the Pro 5700 be used as a standard desktop graphics card?

A: The data indicates no. It is listed as an IGP with no display outputs and no power connectors. It requires a 300 W suggested PSU and is designed for integration into a system, not as a standalone add-in card.

Q: What are the memory bandwidth differences?

A: The RX 5700 XT has 448.0 GB/s from 14 Gbps effective GDDR6, while the Pro 5700 has 384.0 GB/s from 12 Gbps effective GDDR6. Both use 8 GB on a 256-bit bus.

Q: Which card is more power-efficient?

A: The Pro 5700 has a 130 W TDP versus 225 W for the RX 5700 XT. The Pro card also has no power connectors and a 300 W suggested PSU, compared to the RX card's 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin and 550 W suggested PSU. The Pro is significantly more power-lean.

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

A: The Pro 5700's average score of 18189 is nearly identical to the RTX 3060 Mobile (18159, delta 0.2%) and RTX 2060 SUPER (18093, delta 0.5%). The RX 5700 XT's average of 16361 is within 0.3% of the RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell and Radeon PRO W7500, and within 0.9% of the RTX 5090 D V2.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 5700 XT is the winner for any conventional graphics task. Its DirectX 9, 10, 11, and 12 scores all exceed the Pro 5700 by margins from 25% to 36.7%. Gamers, 3D rendering, and any workload that relies on Metal or Vulkan will see better results on the RX card. Its Geekbench Metal score of 74647 is 19.5% higher, and its Vulkan score of 68310 is 24.9% higher. The RX card also leads in 2D performance (G2D 922 vs 805) and general 3D performance (G3D 16277 vs 11583).

The RX 5700 XT also wins in GPU compute, at least in the PassMark test, with 7650 versus 4961, a 35.2% margin. Its higher texture rate (304.8 GTexel/s vs 194.4 GTexel/s) and pixel rate (121.9 GPixel/s vs 86.40 GPixel/s) support these results. The RX card's FP32 throughput of 9.754 TFLOPS is 56.8% higher than the Pro's 6.221 TFLOPS.

The Pro 5700 wins one specific domain: OpenCL compute. The 454.3% lead in Geekbench OpenCL is the largest delta in the entire dataset. This suggests the Pro 5700 has a specialized driver or hardware path for OpenCL workloads that the RX card lacks. For machine learning, scientific computing, or any application that uses OpenCL as its primary API, the Pro 5700 is the data-backed choice.

The Pro 5700 also wins on power efficiency. At 130 W TDP with no external power connectors, it can be deployed in systems where the RX 5700 XT's 225 W TDP and 550 W PSU requirement would be prohibitive. The Pro card's integrated form factor (IGP, no display outputs) means it is not a drop-in replacement for a desktop GPU, but for embedded or workstation boards where OpenCL matters, it is the superior option.

The average score ranking tells a nuanced story. The Pro 5700 at the 62nd percentile sits above the RX 5700 XT at the 59th percentile, but that ranking is driven entirely by the OpenCL outlier. Removing that one test would place the RX card far ahead. The data does not support a universal recommendation; it supports a workload-specific one.

For most users, the RX 5700 XT is the rational pick. It wins 9 of 10 tests, covers all DirectX versions, both graphics APIs, and general compute. The Pro 5700 is a niche tool for OpenCL-centric environments where its 454.3% advantage justifies the trade-offs in every other category. The recorded data is unambiguous: the RX 5700 XT is the general-purpose performer, the Pro 5700 is the OpenCL specialist.