AMD Radeon PRO V710 vs AMD Radeon RX 5600M Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO V710 has an average benchmark score of 58,657, while the AMD Radeon RX 5600M scores 46,601. The V710 sits at the 88th percentile among all GPUs, compared to the 85th percentile for the RX 5600M.

Q: What is the single biggest performance gap between these two cards?

A: In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the PRO V710 scores 116,460 versus 59,589 for the RX 5600M, a 95.4% advantage. This is the largest recorded delta in the head-to-head data.

Q: Are there any tests where the RX 5600M wins?

A: Yes, in the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, the RX 5600M scores 1,320 compared to the PRO V710's 853, a 35.4% lead for the mobile card.

Q: How does the PRO V710 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The PRO V710 is 0.2% ahead of the NVIDIA P102-100, 0.5% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT, 0.7% ahead of the Intel Arc A570M, and 1% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 5600 OEM.

Q: What are the closest competitors to the RX 5600M?

A: The RX 5600M is essentially tied with the Intel Arc A530M (0% delta), 0.2% behind the AMD Radeon RX 6550M, and 1.2% ahead of the NVIDIA RTX A2000 and 1.4% ahead of the NVIDIA RTX 5880 Ada Generation.

Q: Which card has more shading units and texture units?

A: The PRO V710 has 3,456 shading units and 216 TMUs, while the RX 5600M has 2,304 shading units and 144 TMUs. The PRO V710 also has 96 ROPs versus 64 for the RX 5600M.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon PRO V710 is built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture using the Navi 32 chip, fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. It belongs to the Radeon Pro Navi generation with the codename Wheat Nas. In contrast, the AMD Radeon RX 5600M uses the RDNA 1.0 architecture with the Navi 10 chip, manufactured on a 7 nm process, and sits in the Navi Mobile generation under the RX 5000M series.

The transistor counts differ substantially. The PRO V710 packs 28,100 million transistors on a 346 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 81.2 million transistors per square millimeter. The RX 5600M has 10,300 million transistors on a 251 mm² die, resulting in a density of 41.0 million per square millimeter. This generational jump in density reflects the newer process node.

Memory configurations are a major architectural split. The PRO V710 carries 28 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 224-bit bus, delivering 504.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The RX 5600M has 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, providing 288.0 GB/s. The PRO V710's memory clock is 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective), while the RX 5600M runs at 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective).

The PRO V710 includes 54 ray tracing cores, a feature completely absent from the RX 5600M, which has no RT cores listed. The PRO V710 also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), whereas the RX 5600M is limited to DirectX 12 (12_1). Both cards support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

The PRO V710 is a single-slot card with a 1x 8-pin power connector and a 158 W TDP, requiring a 450 W suggested PSU. The RX 5600M is an integrated form factor (IGP) with no power connectors and a 150 W TDP. The PRO V710 has no display outputs, while the RX 5600M's outputs are portable device dependent.

The release dates are far apart: the PRO V710 launched on October 2, 2024, while the RX 5600M launched on July 6, 2020. The RX 5600M is marked as end-of-life, while the PRO V710 has no production status listed.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded head-to-head data shows a split decision, with each card taking one win. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test favors the AMD Radeon RX 5600M significantly. The RX 5600M scores 1,320 against the PRO V710's 853, giving the mobile card a 35.4% advantage. This is a substantial margin in a DirectX 12 workload, suggesting that the older RDNA 1.0 architecture handles this particular test notably better.

The Geekbench OpenCL test tells the opposite story. The PRO V710 scores 116,460, while the RX 5600M scores 59,589. The PRO V710 leads by 95.4%, nearly doubling the RX 5600M's output. This is the kind of result that separates compute-oriented workloads from gaming-oriented ones. The PRO V710's raw FP32 throughput of 27.65 TFLOPS versus the RX 5600M's 5.829 TFLOPS explains much of this gap.

In the overall average benchmark score, the PRO V710 holds the edge with 58,657 versus 46,601 for the RX 5600M. That is a roughly 25.9% lead in the aggregate, even though the RX 5600M wins the 3DMark test. The PRO V710's percentile ranking of 88 versus 85 for the RX 5600M reinforces this positioning.

The nearest rival data places these cards in different competitive tiers. The PRO V710 trades blows with the NVIDIA P102-100 (0.2% ahead), the AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT (0.5% ahead), and the Intel Arc A570M (0.7% ahead). The RX 5600M sits alongside the Intel Arc A530M (exact tie), the AMD Radeon RX 6550M (0.2% behind), and the NVIDIA RTX A2000 (1.2% ahead). These clusters show that the PRO V710 competes with much higher-tier hardware than the RX 5600M.

The Geekbench OpenCL result is the dominant outlier in favor of the PRO V710. A 95.4% delta is not a marginal difference; it indicates a fundamental capability gap in general-purpose compute. The 3DMark result, while favoring the RX 5600M by 35.4%, does not offset the sheer magnitude of the OpenCL advantage.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split based on workload type. For DirectX 12 gaming-style benchmarks, the AMD Radeon RX 5600M is the stronger performer, delivering a 35.4% higher score in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12. For compute and OpenCL workloads, the AMD Radeon PRO V710 is overwhelmingly superior, with a 95.4% lead in Geekbench OpenCL.

Looking at the aggregate average benchmark score, the PRO V710 wins with 58,657 versus 46,601. This 25.9% overall advantage, combined with its 88th percentile ranking, positions it as the more capable all-around GPU in the database's measurements. The RX 5600M's 85th percentile is respectable but lower.

The PRO V710 also has a massive memory advantage: 28 GB versus 6 GB, with 504.0 GB/s bandwidth compared to 288.0 GB/s. For workloads that rely on large datasets or high memory throughput, the PRO V710 is the clear choice. The RX 5600M's smaller memory footprint and narrower bus limit its ceiling in such scenarios.

The RX 5600M's win in 3DMark Steel Nomad is notable, but it is a single test. The PRO V710's dominance in OpenCL is more than double the margin of the RX 5600M's win. If the selection criteria are compute performance, memory capacity, or modern architecture features like ray tracing, the PRO V710 is the answer. If the priority is a specific DirectX 12 gaming workload, the RX 5600M has the edge in that narrow context.

Neither card is a universal winner. The data supports choosing the PRO V710 for compute-heavy tasks, large memory footprints, and modern API support. The RX 5600M is better suited for the specific DirectX 12 test where it excels, but its overall profile is weaker.

Specification Differences

The PRO V710 uses a 5 nm process node, while the RX 5600M uses 7 nm. Transistor counts are 28,100 million versus 10,300 million. Die sizes are 346 mm² versus 251 mm². Transistor density is 81.2M per mm² versus 41.0M per mm².

Clock speeds differ: the PRO V710 has a base clock of 1900 MHz and a boost of 2000 MHz, while the RX 5600M has a base of 1035 MHz, a boost of 1265 MHz, and a game clock of 1190 MHz. Memory clocks are 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) versus 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective).

Memory capacity is 28 GB versus 6 GB. Bus width is 224-bit versus 192-bit. Bandwidth is 504.0 GB/s versus 288.0 GB/s. Shading units are 3,456 versus 2,304. TMUs are 216 versus 144. ROPs are 96 versus 64. The PRO V710 has 54 ray tracing cores; the RX 5600M has none.

Pixel rate is 192.0 GPixel/s versus 80.96 GPixel/s. Texture rate is 432.0 GTexel/s versus 182.2 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 27.65 TFLOPS versus 5.829 TFLOPS. FP16 performance is 27.65 TFLOPS (1:1) versus 11.66 TFLOPS (2:1).

TDP is 158 W versus 150 W. Slot width is single-slot versus IGP. Power connectors are 1x 8-pin versus none. Suggested PSU is 450 W for the PRO V710; the RX 5600M has none listed. Display outputs are none versus portable device dependent.

DirectX support is 12 Ultimate (12_2) versus 12 (12_1). Release dates are 2024-10-02 versus 2020-07-06. The RX 5600M is end-of-life; the PRO V710 has no production status listed.

Where Each One Wins

The PRO V710 wins in compute-heavy scenarios. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 116,460 is nearly double the RX 5600M's 59,589. The 27.65 TFLOPS FP32 throughput and 504.0 GB/s memory bandwidth make it suited for workloads that process large datasets or require sustained arithmetic throughput.

The PRO V710 also wins on memory capacity. With 28 GB versus 6 GB, it can hold far larger working sets without spilling to slower storage. The 224-bit bus and higher memory clock provide the bandwidth to feed those larger buffers.

Modern API support favors the PRO V710. DirectX 12 Ultimate and 54 ray tracing cores give it capabilities the RX 5600M lacks entirely. The 5 nm process and higher transistor density indicate a more advanced design.

The RX 5600M wins in the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test. Its 1,320 score versus 853 gives it a 35.4% advantage in that specific benchmark. This suggests that for certain DirectX 12 rendering workloads, the older RDNA 1.0 architecture delivers better results.

The RX 5600M also has a lower TDP at 150 W versus 158 W, a small but measurable difference. Its integrated form factor with no power connectors makes it suitable for portable systems where discrete power cabling is not available.

For gaming-oriented users who prioritize the specific 3DMark test where the RX 5600M excels, that card is the better pick. For professionals or compute users who need large memory, high FP32 throughput, and modern features like ray tracing, the PRO V710 is the clear winner. The overall average benchmark score of 58,657 versus 46,601 reinforces that the PRO V710 is the stronger card in the aggregate.