AMD Radeon Pro 580 vs AMD Radeon Pro 580X Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two Ellesmere-based cards share far more than they differ, but the benchmark data reveals distinct strengths in different API workloads. Across three Geekbench tests, the AMD Radeon Pro 580 claims two wins, while the AMD Radeon Pro 580X takes one — and the margins tell a more interesting story than the raw win count.

The clearest victory for the Pro 580 comes in Geekbench Vulkan, where it scores 43,285 against the 580X’s 40,115. That is a 7.9% advantage, the largest delta in either direction across the entire head-to-head. In OpenCL, the Pro 580 repeats with 38,457 versus 36,426, a 5.6% lead. Both results point to the original card maintaining a consistent edge in compute-oriented workloads that leverage these APIs. The Vulkan gap, in particular, is substantial enough that any application built on that API would show measurable performance differences between the two.

The 580X’s sole win is in Geekbench Metal, where it posts 39,577 against the 580’s 39,213. The margin here is slim — just 0.9% — and falls within what could be considered run-to-run variance. Still, it is a notable reversal: the newer 580X performs better in Apple’s native graphics API, which carries weight given both cards are Radeon Pro Mac parts. This suggests the 580X received some tuning or driver optimization for Metal workloads that the 580 lacks, even though the underlying hardware is essentially identical.

Looking at average benchmark scores across all three tests, the Pro 580 lands at 40,318, while the 580X trails at 38,706. That is a 1,612-point gap, or roughly 4% in favor of the older card. The Pro 580’s nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070, averages 40,377 — just 0.1% ahead — making the two effectively interchangeable in aggregate performance. The Pro 580X, meanwhile, sits 0% apart from the NVIDIA GeForce MX570 A at 38,691, and 0.9% behind the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 Mobile. Both cards hold the 82nd percentile among all GPUs, meaning they occupy the same tier in the overall performance distribution despite the 580’s higher absolute scores.

The split is clean: the 580 dominates in Vulkan and OpenCL, while the 580X edges ahead in Metal. For users who primarily run cross-platform compute or Vulkan-based rendering, the 580 is the clear choice. For those locked into Metal-centric workflows, the 580X offers a marginal but real improvement.

FAQ

Q: Which card wins more benchmark tests?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 580 wins two of three head-to-head tests — Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan — while the AMD Radeon Pro 580X wins one, Geekbench Metal. The win count is 2–1 in favor of the 580.

Q: How large is the Vulkan performance gap between the two?

A: The Pro 580 scores 43,285 in Geekbench Vulkan versus 40,115 for the 580X, a 7.9% lead. This is the largest performance difference in any test between the two cards.

Q: Is the Pro 580X better in any workload?

A: Yes. The 580X achieves 39,577 in Geekbench Metal, beating the 580’s 39,213 by 0.9%. This indicates the 580X has a slight advantage in Metal-based applications, likely due to optimizations for Apple’s API.

Q: How do the average scores compare?

A: The Pro 580 averages 40,318 across all benchmarks, while the 580X averages 38,706. The 580 leads by roughly 4% in aggregate performance.

Q: What are the nearest rivals for each card?

A: The Pro 580’s closest competitor is the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 at 40,377, just 0.1% ahead. The 580X’s nearest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce MX570 A at 38,691, with a 0% delta. Both AMD cards sit at the 82nd percentile overall.

Q: Do both cards share the same performance tier?

A: Yes, both hold the 82nd percentile among all GPUs. Despite the 580’s higher raw scores, the two cards occupy the same tier in the broader performance hierarchy.

Architecture Differences

Both cards are built on the same fundamental architecture: GCN 4.0 with the Ellesmere chip, fabricated on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The transistor count is identical at 5,700 million, and the die size matches at 232 mm², yielding the same transistor density of 24.6M per mm². There are no differences in the compute core layout — both feature 2,304 shading units, 144 texture mapping units, and 32 raster output pipelines. Neither card includes dedicated ray tracing or tensor cores, which is consistent with their GCN-generation design.

Clock speeds are also identical at the core level. Both run at a base clock of 1100 MHz and a boost clock of 1200 MHz. The memory clock differs slightly: the 580 runs at 1695 MHz, while the 580X runs at 1710 MHz. Both are rated at 6.8 Gbps effective, but the higher memory clock on the 580X translates to a marginally higher bandwidth figure — 218.9 GB/s versus 217.0 GB/s. This 1.9 GB/s difference is negligible in practice but represents the only hardware clock divergence between the two.

The memory subsystem is otherwise the same: 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus. Pixel rate and texture rate are identical at 38.40 GPixel/s and 172.8 GTexel/s respectively, and both deliver 5.530 TFLOPS for FP32 and FP16 (1:1). Power consumption is rated at 185 W TDP for both cards, and both use integrated graphics packaging with no external power connectors required.

The most significant architectural difference lies in the bus interface and display outputs. The Pro 580 uses a standard PCIe 3.0 x16 interface, while the 580X uses Apple MPX — a proprietary Apple module connector. Display outputs also differ: the 580 lists "Portable Device Dependent" outputs, while the 580X provides 2x HDMI 2.0b. This reflects their different target platforms within the Mac ecosystem, even though the underlying silicon is unchanged.

A subtle difference exists in the memory clock multiplier. The 580’s 1695 MHz memory clock produces 217.0 GB/s, while the 580X’s 1710 MHz produces 218.9 GB/s. The effective data rate is listed as 6.8 Gbps for both, suggesting the 580X achieves its higher bandwidth through a slightly different memory timing configuration rather than a faster effective transfer rate. The practical impact is minimal — roughly 0.9% — but it does mean the 580X has a microscopic theoretical bandwidth advantage.

In terms of API support, both cards are identical: DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. Neither supports newer features like mesh shaders or hardware ray tracing, which would require a more modern architecture. The generation labels differ — "Radeon Pro Mac (500 Series)" for the 580 and "Radeon Pro Mac (500X Series)" for the 580X — but this is a naming distinction rather than an architectural one.

The Verdict

The data presents a straightforward choice depending on workload priorities. The AMD Radeon Pro 580 is the stronger card for OpenCL and Vulkan workloads, with leads of 5.6% and 7.9% respectively. Its average benchmark score of 40,318 also exceeds the 580X’s 38,706 by about 4%. For users running compute-heavy applications that leverage OpenCL or Vulkan, the 580 is objectively better.

However, the 580X is not without merit. Its Geekbench Metal score of 39,577 edges out the 580 by 0.9%, and it offers a slightly higher memory bandwidth of 218.9 GB/s versus 217.0 GB/s. For Metal-centric workflows — which are common in macOS environments — the 580X is the marginally better option. The Apple MPX interface and 2x HDMI 2.0b outputs also make it a more integrated solution for Apple’s modular systems.

The performance tier is identical: both cards sit at the 82nd percentile, and both are end-of-life products. The 580 was released in June 2017, while the 580X followed in March 2019 — a nearly two-year gap that brought no core architectural improvements. The 580X’s only real advantages are the Metal benchmark win, the slightly higher memory clock, and its newer release date.

Users who prioritize raw compute performance in OpenCL or Vulkan should choose the Pro 580 without hesitation. Its 7.9% Vulkan lead is significant and will translate to tangible gains in Vulkan-based renderers or compute pipelines. Users who work exclusively in Metal or who require Apple MPX connectivity should select the 580X, accepting the lower OpenCL and Vulkan scores in exchange for better Metal performance and platform compatibility.

There is no clear overall winner. The 580 wins more tests and has a higher average score, but the 580X wins in the API that matters most for macOS. The choice hinges entirely on which workloads dominate the user’s workflow. For mixed workloads, the 580’s higher average and better cross-API performance make it the safer recommendation. For Metal-only pipelines, the 580X is the appropriate pick despite its lower aggregate numbers.

Specification Differences

The following specifications differ between the AMD Radeon Pro 580 and AMD Radeon Pro 580X:

• Memory Clock: The 580 runs at 1695 MHz, while the 580X runs at 1710 MHz. Both are rated at 6.8 Gbps effective.
• Memory Bandwidth: The 580 delivers 217.0 GB/s, while the 580X delivers 218.9 GB/s — a 1.9 GB/s difference.
• Bus Interface: The 580 uses PCIe 3.0 x16, while the 580X uses Apple MPX.
• Display Outputs: The 580 lists "Portable Device Dependent" outputs, while the 580X provides 2x HDMI 2.0b.
• Power Connectors: The 580 lists "None", while the 580X does not specify a power connector field.
• Generation: The 580 is from the "Radeon Pro Mac (500 Series)" generation, while the 580X is from the "Radeon Pro Mac (500X Series)" generation.
• Release Date: The 580 launched on June 4, 2017, while the 580X launched on March 17, 2019.

All other specifications are identical: 5,700 million transistors, 232 mm² die size, 14 nm process, 1100 MHz base clock, 1200 MHz boost clock, 8 GB GDDR5 memory, 256-bit bus, 2304 shading units, 144 TMUs, 32 ROPs, 38.40 GPixel/s pixel rate, 172.8 GTexel/s texture rate, 5.530 TFLOPS FP32/FP16, 185 W TDP, and identical API support for DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. Both cards are end-of-life and offer no launch MSRP data. The core hardware is functionally the same; the differences are confined to memory timing, platform integration, and release timing.