AMD Radeon Pro 575X vs AMD Radeon RX 5600M Comparison

The Verdict

The recorded data presents a clear hierarchy between these two AMD mobile graphics processors. The AMD Radeon RX 5600M wins all three head-to-head benchmark comparisons, securing a 3-0 sweep. The average benchmark score for the RX 5600M is 46601, while the Radeon Pro 575X averages 39116. The RX 5600M also holds a higher percentile ranking, sitting at the 85th percentile versus the Pro 575X's 82nd percentile.

The RX 5600M is the definitive choice for users seeking maximum graphics throughput in a portable system. Its largest advantage appears in Geekbench Metal, where it scores 76653 against 44655 for the Pro 575X, a 71.7% delta. The OpenCL gap is nearly identical at 71.4%, with scores of 59589 and 34773 respectively. The Vulkan margin narrows to 28.8%, but the RX 5600M still leads with 48843 versus 37919.

The Radeon Pro 575X, while trailing in raw performance, remains a competent option for legacy compatibility. It belongs to the Radeon Pro Mac series, suggesting its design targets Apple's ecosystem. Users constrained to older software stacks or specific Mac-oriented workloads may still find it serviceable, but the data does not support choosing it on performance grounds alone. The Pro 575X's nearest rivals, such as the AMD Radeon Pro 580X and NVIDIA GeForce MX570 A, sit within 1.1% of its average score, confirming it competes in a lower performance tier.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 5600M wins every recorded benchmark category. In Metal, OpenCL, and Vulkan, it posts higher scores. This indicates across-the-board superiority in compute and graphics workloads, regardless of the API used. The Pro 575X, conversely, has no benchmark wins in the head-to-head data.

For users prioritizing modern API performance, the RX 5600M is the only logical pick. Its Vulkan score of 48843 demonstrates strong cross-platform capability, while its Metal result of 76653 suggests excellent performance in Apple's graphics framework despite being a non-Mac product. The Pro 575X's Metal score of 44655 is respectable but falls far short.

The Pro 575X's niche lies in its architectural maturity. Built on GCN 4.0, it may offer better compatibility with older drivers or specialized professional software that has not been updated for RDNA. Its 1:1 FP16 ratio, matching its FP32 throughput at 4.489 TFLOPS, could appeal to workloads requiring consistent precision across formats. However, the RX 5600M's FP16 performance of 11.66 TFLOPS (2:1) is significantly higher when the hardware supports packed math.

Architecture Differences

The RX 5600M utilizes the Navi 10 chip based on RDNA 1.0 architecture, manufactured on a 7 nm process at TSMC. The Pro 575X uses the Ellesmere chip with GCN 4.0 architecture, built on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. This process difference is substantial: the RX 5600M packs 10,300 million transistors into a 251 mm² die, yielding a density of 41.0 million transistors per mm². The Pro 575X contains 5,700 million transistors on a 232 mm² die, for a density of 24.6 million per mm².

Memory configurations diverge sharply. The RX 5600M features 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, delivering 288.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Pro 575X offers 4 GB of GDDR5 on a wider 256-bit bus, but bandwidth drops to 217.0 GB/s. The RX 5600M's memory clock is listed at 1500 MHz with 12 Gbps effective speed, while the Pro 575X runs at 1695 MHz with 6.8 Gbps effective.

Compute unit counts differ as well. The RX 5600M has 2304 shading units, 144 texture mapping units, and 64 render output units. The Pro 575X has 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and only 32 ROPs. This halved ROP count explains the Pro 575X's lower pixel rate of 35.07 GPixel/s versus 80.96 GPixel/s for the RX 5600M. Texture rates are 140.3 GTexel/s and 182.2 GTexel/s respectively.

Both cards draw 150 W TDP and use no power connectors, indicating they are integrated into motherboards as IGP solutions. The RX 5600M supports PCIe 4.0 x16, while the Pro 575X is limited to PCIe 3.0 x16. API support favors the RX 5600M with DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, versus the Pro 575X's DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3. Both support OpenGL 4.6.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 5600M records an average benchmark score of 46601, while the AMD Radeon Pro 575X averages 39116. The RX 5600M leads by roughly 19% based on these averages.

Q: How large is the performance gap in Geekbench Metal?

A: The RX 5600M scores 76653 in Geekbench Metal, compared to 44655 for the Pro 575X. This represents a 71.7% advantage for the RX 5600M, the largest margin in any head-to-head test.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same DirectX version?

A: No. The RX 5600M supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while the Pro 575X supports DirectX 12 (12_0). The RX 5600M also supports Vulkan 1.4 versus Vulkan 1.3 on the Pro 575X.

Q: What are the memory specifications for each card?

A: The RX 5600M has 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Pro 575X has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 217.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has a higher transistor density?

A: The RX 5600M achieves 41.0 million transistors per mm² on its 7 nm process. The Pro 575X, on a 14 nm process, achieves 24.6 million per mm².

Q: Are both GPUs still in production?

A: Both are listed as end-of-life. The RX 5600M was released in July 2020, while the Pro 575X was released in March 2019.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most decisive victory for the RX 5600M comes in Geekbench Metal. Its score of 76653 towers over the Pro 575X's 44655, a delta of 71.7%. This is the largest percentage gap in the entire comparison. Metal performance is particularly relevant for macOS environments, and the data shows the RX 5600M would handle such workloads with substantially more headroom.

Geekbench OpenCL produces a nearly identical margin. The RX 5600M scores 59589, while the Pro 575X manages 34773. The delta is 71.4%, just three-tenths of a percentage point less than the Metal gap. OpenCL remains widely used for cross-platform compute, so this result reinforces the RX 5600M's general compute superiority.

The Vulkan test narrows the gap considerably. The RX 5600M scores 48843, and the Pro 575X scores 37919. The delta is 28.8%, still a decisive win but less than half the margin seen in Metal and OpenCL. This suggests the Pro 575X's GCN architecture handles Vulkan relatively better than other APIs, or that the RX 5600M's RDNA design does not scale its advantage as strongly in Vulkan.

For context, the RX 5600M's nearest rivals include the Intel Arc A530M at 46614 (0% delta), the AMD Radeon RX 6550M at 46702 (-0.2%), and the NVIDIA RTX A2000 at 46043 (1.2%). This places the RX 5600M in a competitive mid-range tier. The Pro 575X's nearest rivals, the AMD Radeon Pro 580X at 38706 (1.1%) and NVIDIA GeForce MX570 A at 38691 (1.1%), confirm it operates in a lower performance class. Notably, the RX 5600M also has a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1320, a test the Pro 575X did not undergo.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every major specification category. The RX 5600M uses a 7 nm process from TSMC, while the Pro 575X uses a 14 nm process from GlobalFoundries. Transistor counts are 10,300 million versus 5,700 million. Die sizes are similar at 251 mm² and 232 mm², but transistor density favors the RX 5600M at 41.0M per mm² versus 24.6M per mm².

Memory specs show a trade-off between capacity and bus width. The RX 5600M has 6 GB GDDR6 with a 192-bit bus and 288.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Pro 575X has 4 GB GDDR5 with a 256-bit bus and 217.0 GB/s bandwidth. Memory clocks are 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective) for the RX 5600M and 1695 MHz (6.8 Gbps effective) for the Pro 575X.

Compute resources favor the RX 5600M in every count: 2304 shading units versus 2048, 144 TMUs versus 128, and 64 ROPs versus 32. Pixel rate is 80.96 GPixel/s versus 35.07 GPixel/s, and texture rate is 182.2 GTexel/s versus 140.3 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 5.829 TFLOPS versus 4.489 TFLOPS. FP16 performance differs dramatically: the RX 5600M achieves 11.66 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, while the Pro 575X stays at 4.489 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio.

Both cards share a 150 W TDP, IGP slot width, no power connectors, and portable-device-dependent display outputs. The RX 5600M uses PCIe 4.0 x16, the Pro 575X uses PCIe 3.0 x16. API support gives the RX 5600M DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, versus DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3 for the Pro 575X. Both support OpenGL 4.6. Release dates are July 2020 for the RX 5600M and March 2019 for the Pro 575X, and both are end-of-life products.