AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 vs AMD Radeon RX 5700 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data presents a clear and unambiguous split: the AMD Radeon RX 5700 wins every single head-to-head comparison, while the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 records zero victories. Across the three shared tests — Geekbench Metal, OpenCL, and Vulkan — the RX 5700 dominates with margins ranging from roughly two-thirds to nearly three-quarters. This is not a close contest by any measure.

Looking at the Geekbench Metal results, the RX 5700 scores 86,079 against the Pro Vega 16's 29,650, a delta of -65.6% from the perspective of the older card. In OpenCL, the gap widens further: 69,603 versus 18,268, a -73.8% difference. The Vulkan test shows similar disparity, with the RX 5700 posting 64,166 against 21,832, a -66% delta. The pattern is consistent across all three APIs, indicating a fundamental performance advantage rather than a workload-specific quirk.

The aggregate benchmark scores reinforce this narrative. The Pro Vega 16 averages 23,250 across all its benchmark entries, while the RX 5700 averages 22,170. Interestingly, the raw averages appear close, but this is misleading — the Pro Vega 16's average is computed from only three Geekbench tests, whereas the RX 5700 includes eleven tests spanning PassMark DirectX 9 through 12, G2D, G3D, and compute workloads. The RX 5700's broader test coverage pulls its average down relative to its Geekbench scores, yet it still lands within 5% of the Pro Vega 16's average, which itself benefits from being a smaller, more consistent sample.

Percentile rankings place both cards near each other globally: the Pro Vega 16 sits at the 68th percentile of all GPUs, while the RX 5700 rests at the 67th. This proximity in percentile is somewhat counterintuitive given the head-to-head deltas, but it reflects the fact that the RX 5700's additional benchmark results include older DirectX tests where it scores modestly (e.g., PassMark DirectX 9 at 209, DirectX 12 at 54), dragging its comparative standing.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different architectural eras and design philosophies. The Pro Vega 16 is built on the Vega 12 chip using GCN 5.0 architecture, fabricated on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. Its successor-free lineage places it in the Radeon Pro Mac series, a generation explicitly labeled "Radeon Pro Mac (Vega Series)." The RX 5700, by contrast, uses the Navi 10 chip with RDNA 1.0 architecture, manufactured on a 7 nm process at TSMC, and belongs to the Radeon RX 5000 series within the "Navi (RX 5000)" generation.

The process node difference is stark: 14 nm versus 7 nm. This translates directly into transistor density and die characteristics. The RX 5700 packs 10,300 million transistors into a 251 mm² die, yielding a density of 41.0M per mm². The Pro Vega 16's transistor count and die size are not listed, but the architectural generational leap is evident from the specifications that are available.

Core configurations differ substantially. The Pro Vega 16 fields 1,024 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The RX 5700 nearly doubles the shading units to 2,304, more than doubles TMUs to 144, and doubles ROPs to 64. These are not incremental changes; they represent a fundamental scaling of compute resources.

Memory subsystems diverge as well. The Pro Vega 16 uses 4 GB of HBM2 on a 1024-bit bus, delivering 307.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The RX 5700 uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, but achieves 448.0 GB/s through a higher 14 Gbps effective memory clock. Despite the narrower bus, the RX 5700's GDDR6 offers nearly 46% more bandwidth than the Pro Vega 16's HBM2.

Clock speeds favor the RX 5700 across the board. Its base clock of 1,465 MHz and boost of 1,725 MHz dwarf the Pro Vega 16's 815 MHz base and 1,190 MHz boost. The RX 5700 also lists a game clock of 1,625 MHz, a specification the Pro Vega 16 does not define. Pixel and texture rates follow suit: the RX 5700 achieves 110.4 GPixel/s and 248.4 GTexel/s, against the Pro Vega 16's 38.08 GPixel/s and 76.16 GTexel/s. FP32 throughput measures 7.949 TFLOPS for the RX 5700 versus 2.437 TFLOPS for the Pro Vega 16.

API support shows minor differences. Both support DirectX 12 (12_1) and OpenGL 4.6, but the RX 5700 lists Vulkan 1.4 while the Pro Vega 16 lists Vulkan 1.3. The RX 5700 also gains a PCIe 4.0 x16 interface over the Pro Vega 16's PCIe 3.0 x16.

The Verdict

The data makes the choice straightforward for anyone prioritizing raw compute performance: the AMD Radeon RX 5700 is categorically faster in every measured workload. Its triple-digit percentage advantages in Geekbench Metal, OpenCL, and Vulkan leave no room for ambiguity. The RX 5700 also offers double the memory capacity (8 GB versus 4 GB) and 46% more memory bandwidth, making it the superior option for memory-intensive rendering or compute tasks.

However, the Pro Vega 16 is not without its niche. Its 75 W TDP versus the RX 5700's 180 W means it draws substantially less power — though the exact efficiency ratio is not directly listed, the 105 W difference is explicit. Its IGP slot width indicates it is designed for integrated or portable deployments, whereas the RX 5700 is a dual-slot card requiring 1x 6-pin and 1x 8-pin power connectors, plus a 450 W suggested PSU. For a compact Mac-oriented system, the Pro Vega 16's form factor and power profile are meaningful advantages that benchmark scores alone do not capture.

The production status of both cards is end-of-life, so neither represents a future-proof investment. The RX 5700 lists a launch MSRP of 349 USD. The Pro Vega 16 has no MSRP listed. For users who need maximum compute in a full-size desktop chassis, the RX 5700 is the data-backed choice. For those constrained by a portable or integrated form factor where the Pro Vega 16's IGP design fits, the performance gap is the accepted trade-off.

FAQ

Q: Which card performs better in Geekbench Metal?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 5700 scores 86,079 versus the Pro Vega 16's 29,650, a -65.6% delta for the Pro Vega 16.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference between the two?

A: The RX 5700 provides 448.0 GB/s via 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, while the Pro Vega 16 provides 307.2 GB/s via 4 GB of HBM2 on a 1024-bit bus.

Q: How do their power requirements compare?

A: The Pro Vega 16 has a 75 W TDP and is listed as IGP slot width, while the RX 5700 has a 180 W TDP, is dual-slot, and requires 1x 6-pin plus 1x 8-pin power connectors with a 450 W suggested PSU.

Q: Do both cards support the same APIs?

A: Both support DirectX 12 (12_1) and OpenGL 4.6. The RX 5700 supports Vulkan 1.4, while the Pro Vega 16 supports Vulkan 1.3.

Q: What are the global percentile rankings?

A: The Pro Vega 16 ranks at the 68th percentile of all GPUs, while the RX 5700 ranks at the 67th.

Q: Which card has more shading units?

A: The RX 5700 has 2,304 shading units, compared to the Pro Vega 16's 1,024.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Geekbench Metal test delivers the RX 5700's most decisive victory in absolute terms. The RX 5700's 86,079 score dwarfs the Pro Vega 16's 29,650, a gap of 56,429 points. In percentage terms, the Pro Vega 16 trails by 65.6%. This is the largest raw score difference among the three shared benchmarks, though not the largest percentage gap.

Geekbench OpenCL shows the steepest relative decline for the Pro Vega 16. Its score of 18,268 against the RX 5700's 69,603 represents a -73.8% delta. This means the RX 5700 is nearly four times faster in OpenCL compute workloads — a dramatic margin that suggests the Pro Vega 16's GCN architecture is particularly disadvantaged in this API's memory access patterns or compute scheduling.

Geekbench Vulkan falls between the other two in both absolute and relative terms. The Pro Vega 16 scores 21,832, the RX 5700 scores 64,166, and the delta is -66%. While slightly less punishing than OpenCL, this still indicates a comfortable three-to-one advantage for the RX 5700.

Across all three tests, the RX 5700 wins with deltas between -65.6% and -73.8%, and the Pro Vega 16 secures zero wins. The consistency of these margins — all within a roughly eight-point percentage range — suggests the RX 5700's advantage is architectural and systematic rather than workload-specific. Whether the workload leans on Metal's GPU compute, OpenCL's general-purpose kernels, or Vulkan's cross-platform graphics, the RX 5700 maintains a similar three-to-one or better lead.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two cards, with all values taken directly from the fact pack:

| Specification | AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 | AMD Radeon RX 5700 |

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

| Series | null | Radeon RX 5000 series |

| Chip | Vega 12 | Navi 10 |

| Architecture | GCN 5.0 | RDNA 1.0 |

| Generation | Radeon Pro Mac (Vega Series) | Navi (RX 5000) |

| Process Node | 14 nm | 7 nm |

| Foundry | GlobalFoundries | TSMC |

| Transistors | null | 10,300 million |

| Die Size | null | 251 mm² |

| Transistor Density | null | 41.0M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 815 MHz | 1,465 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1,190 MHz | 1,725 MHz |

| Game Clock | null | 1,625 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1,200 MHz, 2.4 Gbps effective | 1,750 MHz, 14 Gbps effective |

| Memory Size | 4 GB | 8 GB |

| Memory Type | HBM2 | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus Width | 1024 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 307.2 GB/s | 448.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 1,024 | 2,304 |

| TMUs | 64 | 144 |

| ROPs | 32 | 64 |

| Pixel Rate | 38.08 GPixel/s | 110.4 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 76.16 GTexel/s | 248.4 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 2.437 TFLOPS | 7.949 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 4.874 TFLOPS (2:1) | 15.90 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 75 W | 180 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | null | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | null | 450 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 1x HDMI 2.0b, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a |

| Vulkan Version | 1.3 | 1.4 |

| Dimensions | null | 268 mm x 111 mm x 36 mm |

| Release Date | 2018-11-13 | 2019-07-06 |

| Predecessor | null | Vega |

| Successor | null | Navi II |

| Launch MSRP | null | 349 USD |