AMD Radeon Pro 575X vs AMD Radeon RX 560 XT Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a clear, if not overwhelming, victory for the AMD Radeon Pro 575X across the two shared benchmark tests. In Geekbench OpenCL, the Pro 575X scores 34,773 against the RX 560 XT's 31,387. That is a 10.8% advantage, the largest single gap between the two cards in any test. The difference is substantial enough to shift the Pro 575X into a higher performance tier in compute workloads that rely on OpenCL.

The Geekbench Vulkan result narrows the gap considerably. The Pro 575X scores 37,919, while the RX 560 XT trails at 36,879, a margin of only 2.8%. This suggests that in Vulkan-based applications, the two cards are much closer in practical performance, and the RX 560 XT is able to close most of the compute deficit seen in OpenCL. Still, the Pro 575X wins both head-to-head tests, giving it a 2-0 record in the direct comparison.

Looking at the broader database context, the Pro 575X holds an average benchmark score of 39,116 across all recorded tests, placing it in the 82nd percentile of all GPUs. The RX 560 XT averages 34,133, which lands it in the 79th percentile. The 2,983-point average gap reflects the Pro 575X's consistent edge, but the percentile difference of only three points shows that both cards occupy a similar overall performance class. The Pro 575X sits about 1.1% above the Radeon Pro 580X and the GeForce MX570 A in the rival rankings, while the RX 560 XT is effectively tied with the RTX A2000 12 GB, which trails by only 0.1%, and the RTX A1000, which leads by 0.2%. The RX 560 XT also edges out the RX 480 by 0.4% and the HD 7950 by 0.5%, showing that its position in the database is tightly contested.

The win count is small but unambiguous. Two tests, two wins for the Pro 575X. In OpenCL the margin is decisive, in Vulkan it is modest. Any buyer or integrator choosing between these two should weigh the Pro 575X's consistent compute advantage against the RX 560 XT's closer Vulkan showing, depending on the workload profile.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins in Geekbench OpenCL performance?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 575X wins, scoring 34,773 against the RX 560 XT's 31,387, a 10.8% advantage.

Q: How close are the two cards in Vulkan benchmarks?

A: The Pro 575X scores 37,919 and the RX 560 XT scores 36,879, so the Pro 575X leads by 2.8%. This is a much tighter margin than the OpenCL result.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each card?

A: The Pro 575X has an average benchmark score of 39,116, while the RX 560 XT averages 34,133. The Pro 575X also sits in the 82nd percentile of all GPUs, compared to the 79th percentile for the RX 560 XT.

Q: Do both cards use the same graphics chip?

A: Yes, both are built on the Ellesmere chip using GCN 4.0 architecture, manufactured on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries.

Q: How does the RX 560 XT compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The RX 560 XT is effectively tied with the NVIDIA RTX A2000 12 GB, which trails by 0.1%, and the RTX A1000, which leads by 0.2%. It also beats the AMD Radeon RX 480 by 0.4% and the AMD Radeon HD 7950 by 0.5%.

Q: Which card has a higher shading unit count?

A: The Pro 575X has 2,048 shading units, while the RX 560 XT has 1,792. The Pro 575X also has 128 texture mapping units versus 112 on the RX 560 XT, although both have 32 ROPs.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs trace their lineage to the same fundamental design. They share the Ellesmere chip, GCN 4.0 architecture, a 14 nm process node, and fabrication at GlobalFoundries. Transistor counts are identical at 5,700 million, and the die size is the same 232 mm², giving both a transistor density of 24.6 million per square millimeter. At the silicon level, these are close relatives rather than distant competitors.

The differences begin with execution resources. The Pro 575X fields 2,048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The RX 560 XT reduces the shader count to 1,792, trims TMUs to 112, but keeps 32 ROPs. This means the Pro 575X has a 14.3% advantage in raw shader count and a matching 14.3% lead in texture units, while pixel throughput stays equal. The extra shading hardware is the primary reason the Pro 575X pulls ahead in compute-heavy workloads like OpenCL.

Clock behavior further separates the two, though the Pro 575X's base and boost clocks are not recorded in the database. The RX 560 XT runs at a 1,074 MHz base clock and a 1,226 MHz boost clock. The memory clocks differ as well: the Pro 575X runs its GDDR5 at 1,695 MHz (6.8 Gbps effective), while the RX 560 XT runs at 1,750 MHz (7 Gbps effective). The RX 560 XT's higher memory clock yields 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth versus 217.0 GB/s on the Pro 575X, a 3.2% advantage for the RX 560 XT in memory throughput. Despite the Pro 575X having more shading units, the RX 560 XT posts a higher pixel rate at 39.23 GPixel/s versus 35.07 GPixel/s, and a slightly lower texture rate at 137.3 GTexel/s versus 140.3 GTexel/s. The FP32 throughput is nearly identical: 4.394 TFLOPS for the RX 560 XT and 4.489 TFLOPS for the Pro 575X, a gap of only about 2.2%. FP16 rates mirror FP32 on both cards at a 1:1 ratio.

API support is a point of parity. Both cards support DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. Neither card includes ray tracing cores or tensor cores, as those are absent from the GCN 4.0 design. The generational labels differ, with the Pro 575X listed under the Radeon Pro Mac (500X Series) generation and the RX 560 XT under Polaris (RX 500), but both are end-of-life products. The RX 560 XT lists its predecessor as Arctic Islands and its successor as Vega, while the Pro 575X has no recorded predecessor or successor.

Specification Differences

The two cards share a substantial portion of their specification sheets, but the differences that exist are meaningful for performance and installation.

• Shading Units: Pro 575X has 2,048, RX 560 XT has 1,792.
• Texture Mapping Units: Pro 575X has 128, RX 560 XT has 112.
• Base Clock: Pro 575X has no recorded base clock, RX 560 XT runs at 1,074 MHz.
• Boost Clock: Pro 575X has no recorded boost clock, RX 560 XT runs at 1,226 MHz.
• Memory Clock: Pro 575X runs at 1,695 MHz (6.8 Gbps effective), RX 560 XT runs at 1,750 MHz (7 Gbps effective).
• Memory Bandwidth: Pro 575X delivers 217.0 GB/s, RX 560 XT delivers 224.0 GB/s.
• Pixel Rate: Pro 575X is 35.07 GPixel/s, RX 560 XT is 39.23 GPixel/s.
• Texture Rate: Pro 575X is 140.3 GTexel/s, RX 560 XT is 137.3 GTexel/s.
• FP32 / FP16: Pro 575X is 4.489 TFLOPS, RX 560 XT is 4.394 TFLOPS.
• Slot Width: Pro 575X is listed as IGP, RX 560 XT is dual-slot.
• Power Connectors: Pro 575X has none, RX 560 XT requires a single 6-pin connector.
• Suggested PSU: Pro 575X has no recorded recommendation, RX 560 XT suggests 450 W.
• Display Outputs: Pro 575X is portable device dependent, RX 560 XT offers 1x HDMI 2.0b and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a.
• Dimensions: Pro 575X has no recorded length, RX 560 XT is 241 mm (9.5 inches).
• Release Date: Pro 575X released on 2019-03-17, RX 560 XT released on 2019-03-12, a five-day gap.
• TDP: Both are rated at 150 W.

Memory size, type, and bus width are identical: 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus. Both use PCIe 3.0 x16. Both list no launch MSRP in the database.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon Pro 575X is the stronger compute card in this pairing. Its 10.8% OpenCL lead is the headline result, and it also wins in Vulkan by 2.8%. The extra 256 shading units and 16 additional TMUs give it a structural advantage in workloads that scale with execution width. For OpenCL compute tasks such as rendering, simulation, or data processing, the Pro 575X is the better choice based on the recorded measurements. Its average benchmark score of 39,116 places it in the 82nd percentile, and it sits within 1.1% of the Radeon Pro 580X, a higher-tier professional card. Its integrated form factor, listed as IGP with no power connectors, also makes it suitable for systems where expansion slots and external power cabling are unavailable.

The AMD Radeon RX 560 XT wins in narrower, more specific areas. Its memory bandwidth is 3.2% higher at 224.0 GB/s, and its pixel rate is 11.9% higher at 39.23 GPixel/s, which can benefit fill-rate-bound scenarios. Its boost clock of 1,226 MHz is recorded, while the Pro 575X has no recorded boost clock, suggesting the RX 560 XT is tuned more aggressively for consumer workloads. In Vulkan, the performance gap shrinks to just 2.8%, meaning that for Vulkan-based gaming or compute, the RX 560 XT is nearly on par with the Pro 575X despite its lower shader count. The RX 560 XT also offers a standard dual-slot form factor, a single 6-pin power connector, and dedicated display outputs including HDMI 2.0b and three DisplayPort 1.4a connections, making it the more flexible option for a conventional desktop build.

The database's nearest rival data reinforces this split. The Pro 575X competes with professional and mobile workstation parts like the Radeon Pro 580X and RTX A500 Mobile, while the RX 560 XT sits alongside consumer and older workstation cards like the RX 480 and HD 7950. The RX 560 XT's average score of 34,133 puts it in the 79th percentile, just three points behind the Pro 575X. That close percentile ranking, despite the Pro 575X's 14.6% average score advantage, indicates that the RX 560 XT is a capable performer in its own right, especially in scenarios where its higher memory bandwidth and pixel throughput come into play.

For users prioritizing raw compute throughput and OpenCL performance, the Pro 575X is the clear winner. For those who need a drop-in consumer card with standard display outputs, a defined power connector, and competitive Vulkan performance, the RX 560 XT holds its own. The data does not support a universal winner, but it does support a role-based one: the Pro 575X for compute, the RX 560 XT for conventional desktop use and fill-rate-sensitive tasks.