AMD Radeon Pro 580X vs AMD Radeon RX 480 Comparison

# AMD Radeon Pro 580X vs AMD Radeon RX 480

The AMD Radeon Pro 580X and the AMD Radeon RX 480 share the same Ellesmere chip, GCN 4.0 architecture, and 14 nm GlobalFoundries process, yet they serve different segments. The database records show the Pro 580X as an integrated graphics solution for Apple MPX systems, while the RX 480 is a dual-slot, PCIe 3.0 x16 add-in card. In head-to-head testing across three benchmarks, the RX 480 wins all three, with the largest margin in Geekbench Metal at 22.5% ahead. However, the Pro 580X holds a higher overall percentile ranking at 82 versus 78 for the RX 480, a nuance driven by the averaging methods and the different benchmark suites applied to each card.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 480 demonstrates clear superiority in every direct comparison available in the database. In Geekbench Metal, it scores 51057 against the Pro 580X's 39577, a 22.5% advantage. This is the most decisive win in the head-to-head data. The RX 480 also leads in Geekbench OpenCL with 37998 versus 36426, a 4.1% margin, and in Geekbench Vulkan with 45968 versus 40115, a 12.7% gap. For any workload that leverages Metal, OpenCL, or Vulkan, the RX 480 is the stronger performer.

The Pro 580X, by contrast, does not win any of the three recorded head-to-head tests. Its strengths lie elsewhere. It is built as an IGP (integrated graphics processor) for Apple MPX bus systems, meaning it occupies no expansion slot and uses no external power connectors. Its 185 W TDP is higher than the RX 480's 150 W, but it is designed for a fixed platform where power delivery and cooling are handled by the host system. The RX 480, with its dual-slot cooler and 1x 6-pin power connector, is the conventional discrete option, requiring a 450 W suggested power supply.

In terms of benchmark diversity, the RX 480 also has an additional recorded test: 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, where it scores 966. The Pro 580X has no corresponding result, so any comparison in that specific workload is not possible from the recorded data.

Architecture Differences

Both cards are built on the Ellesmere chip with GCN 4.0 architecture, fabricated by GlobalFoundries on a 14 nm process. Transistor count is identical at 5,700 million, and the die size is the same at 232 mm², yielding a transistor density of 24.6M per mm². Both have 2304 shading units, 144 texture mapping units, and 32 render output units. Neither card has ray tracing cores or tensor cores.

The differences begin with clock speeds. The Pro 580X runs at a base clock of 1100 MHz and a boost clock of 1200 MHz. The RX 480 runs slightly higher at 1120 MHz base and 1266 MHz boost. Memory clocks also differ: the Pro 580X uses 1710 MHz with 6.8 Gbps effective data rate, while the RX 480 uses 2000 MHz with 8 Gbps effective. Both have 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256 bit bus, but the resulting bandwidth favors the RX 480 at 256.0 GB/s versus 218.9 GB/s for the Pro 580X.

These clock and memory differences cascade into compute rates. The Pro 580X delivers 38.40 GPixel/s pixel rate, 172.8 GTexel/s texture rate, and 5.530 TFLOPS FP32. The RX 480 delivers 40.51 GPixel/s, 182.3 GTexel/s, and 5.834 TFLOPS FP32. Both cards have 1:1 FP16 to FP32 ratios, so FP16 performance matches their FP32 figures. The RX 480 is ahead in every throughput metric.

The physical and platform differences are substantial. The Pro 580X uses an Apple MPX bus interface and is listed as IGP slot width, with display outputs limited to 2x HDMI 2.0b. The RX 480 uses PCIe 3.0 x16, is dual-slot, measures 240 mm by 95 mm by 35 mm, has a 1x 6-pin power connector, and offers 1x HDMI 2.0b plus 3x DisplayPort 1.4a. The RX 480 also has a release date of 2016-06-28 and a launch MSRP of 229 USD, while the Pro 580X was released on 2019-03-17 with no recorded MSRP.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The three direct comparisons give a consistent picture. In Geekbench Metal, the RX 480 scores 51057, which is 22.5% higher than the Pro 580X's 39577. This is the largest relative gap in the dataset and indicates a substantial advantage in Apple's Metal API, which is notable because the Pro 580X is specifically designed for Apple MPX systems. Despite that intended ecosystem fit, the RX 480 still outperforms it in this API.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the margin narrows considerably. The RX 480 scores 37998 versus 36426 for the Pro 580X, a 4.1% difference. This suggests that in general-purpose compute via OpenCL, the two cards are much closer, with the RX 480's higher clocks and memory bandwidth providing only a modest edge.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the RX 480 scores 45968 against 40115, a 12.7% lead. This places the RX 480 clearly ahead in cross-platform graphics workloads, though not by as wide a margin as in Metal. The pattern across all three tests is that the RX 480 wins, but the size of the win varies from a tight 4.1% in OpenCL to a dominant 22.5% in Metal.

The average benchmark score in the database tells a slightly different story. The Pro 580X has an average score of 38706 across its three recorded benchmarks, while the RX 480 has an average of 33997 across four. The Pro 580X's higher average is partly due to the lack of a low-scoring 3DMark result in its suite. The RX 480's 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 966 pulls its average down, even though it wins all three Geekbench tests. This explains why the Pro 580X sits at the 82nd percentile of all GPUs while the RX 480 sits at the 78th, despite losing every head-to-head matchup.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous in direct performance terms: the AMD Radeon RX 480 wins all three head-to-head benchmarks against the AMD Radeon Pro 580X. The margins are 22.5% in Metal, 12.7% in Vulkan, and 4.1% in OpenCL. For any user comparing raw compute and graphics throughput in these APIs, the RX 480 is the better card.

However, the Pro 580X is not without its own case. Its higher percentile ranking (82 versus 78) and higher average benchmark score (38706 versus 33997) reflect that its benchmark suite is different and that within its intended Apple MPX platform, it performs competitively. The Pro 580X is an integrated solution with no power connectors and no expansion slot requirement, making it suitable for systems where a discrete card cannot be installed. It also consumes 185 W, which is higher than the RX 480's 150 W, but that power is managed by the host platform.

The RX 480, meanwhile, is a traditional dual-slot card with a 6-pin connector, a 450 W suggested power supply, and dimensions of 240 mm by 95 mm by 35 mm. It offers more display outputs, including three DisplayPort 1.4a connections, and it has a higher memory bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s.

Users who need maximum performance in Metal, Vulkan, or OpenCL should choose the RX 480. Users who require an integrated graphics solution for an Apple MPX system, or who prioritize the higher overall percentile ranking, should consider the Pro 580X. The nearest rivals in the database for the Pro 580X include the NVIDIA GeForce MX570 A (delta 0%), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 Mobile (delta 0.9%), and the NVIDIA GeForce MX570 (delta 1.1%), placing it in a competitive middle tier. The RX 480's nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon HD 7950 (delta 0.1%) and the AMD Radeon RX 560 XT (delta -0.4%), showing that its performance level is comparable to older and newer AMD parts alike.

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 480 has a boost clock of 1266 MHz, while the AMD Radeon Pro 580X has a boost clock of 1200 MHz.

Q: How much memory bandwidth does each card provide?

A: The RX 480 provides 256.0 GB/s, while the Pro 580X provides 218.9 GB/s, both over a 256 bit bus with 8 GB GDDR5.

Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two cards?

A: The largest gap is in Geekbench Metal, where the RX 480 leads by 22.5% with a score of 51057 versus 39577.

Q: Which card has a higher overall percentile ranking?

A: The Pro 580X ranks at the 82nd percentile of all GPUs, while the RX 480 ranks at the 78th percentile.

Q: Are there any benchmarks where the Pro 580X wins?

A: No, the Pro 580X wins zero of the three head-to-head benchmarks recorded. The RX 480 wins all three.

Q: Do both cards support the same APIs?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon Pro 580X | AMD Radeon RX 480 |

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

| Process node | 14 nm | 14 nm |

| Foundry | GlobalFoundries | GlobalFoundries |

| Transistors | 5,700 million | 5,700 million |

| Die size | 232 mm² | 232 mm² |

| Base clock | 1100 MHz | 1120 MHz |

| Boost clock | 1200 MHz | 1266 MHz |

| Memory clock | 1710 MHz, 6.8 Gbps effective | 2000 MHz, 8 Gbps effective |

| Memory bandwidth | 218.9 GB/s | 256.0 GB/s |

| Pixel rate | 38.40 GPixel/s | 40.51 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 172.8 GTexel/s | 182.3 GTexel/s |

| FP32 performance | 5.530 TFLOPS | 5.834 TFLOPS |

| FP16 performance | 5.530 TFLOPS (1:1) | 5.834 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 185 W | 150 W |

| Slot width | IGP | Dual-slot |

| Power connectors | None | 1x 6-pin |

| Suggested PSU | None | 450 W |

| Bus interface | Apple MPX | PCIe 3.0 x16 |

| Display outputs | 2x HDMI 2.0b | 1x HDMI 2.0b, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a |

| Dimensions | Not recorded | 240 mm x 95 mm x 35 mm |

| Release date | 2019-03-17 | 2016-06-28 |

| Launch MSRP | None | 229 USD |

| Generation | Radeon Pro Mac (500X Series) | Arctic Islands (RX 400) |