AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 vs AMD Radeon RX 5600M Comparison

The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 and AMD Radeon RX 5600M represent two distinct approaches to mobile graphics from the same manufacturer, separated by architecture generation and design goals. The recorded data shows the Pro Vega 56, a GCN 5.0 part built on 14 nm, winning two of the three head-to-head benchmark comparisons, while the RX 5600M, an RDNA 1.0 part on 7 nm, takes the remaining test. Their average benchmark scores, however, tell a more complex story, with the Pro Vega 56 posting a 63693 average against the RX 5600M's 46601, a gap that is heavily influenced by the specific workloads measured.

Where Each One Wins

The usage split between these two GPUs is defined by their benchmark results and their architectural priorities. The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 demonstrates its strength in compute-oriented and legacy API workloads. It wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 61930 against the RX 5600M's 59589, a 3.9% advantage, and it dominates Geekbench Vulkan with 66004 versus 48843, a substantial 35.1% lead. These results indicate that the Pro Vega 56 is better suited for applications that leverage general-purpose compute, OpenCL acceleration, and Vulkan rendering paths.

The AMD Radeon RX 5600M takes a decisive victory in the Geekbench Metal test, scoring 76653 against the Pro Vega 56's 63145, a 17.6% advantage. This is the sole benchmark win for the RX 5600M, and it reflects the architecture's efficiency in Apple's Metal API, which is often used in creative and content production workflows. For users operating within a Metal-centric software ecosystem, the RX 5600M is the clear performer, but for broader compute tasks, the Pro Vega 56 holds the edge.

The overall percentile ranking also favors the Pro Vega 56, which sits at the 89th percentile among all GPUs, while the RX 5600M ranks at the 85th percentile. The Pro Vega 56's nearest rivals, such as the AMD Radeon RX 7600M with an average score of 63775, show a negligible delta of -0.1%, placing the Pro Vega 56 in a tightly competitive band. The RX 5600M, by contrast, trades blows with the Intel Arc A530M, which matches its 46614 average score at a 0% delta, and the NVIDIA RTX A2000, which trails by 1.2%. The data suggests the Pro Vega 56 is a higher-tier performer on average, while the RX 5600M is more specialized.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two mobile GPUs is significant, reflecting the generational shift from GCN to RDNA. The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 uses the Vega 10 chip on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries, with a die size of 495 mm² and 12,500 million transistors. This results in a transistor density of 25.3M per mm². The RX 5600M, in contrast, uses the Navi 10 chip fabricated by TSMC on a 7 nm process, with a die size of 251 mm² and 10,300 million transistors, yielding a much higher density of 41.0M per mm². The smaller, denser die is a hallmark of the newer RDNA architecture.

The compute resources differ markedly. The Pro Vega 56 packs 3584 shading units, 224 texture mapping units, and 64 render output units. The RX 5600M has 2304 shading units and 144 TMUs, but it retains 64 ROPs. This gives the Pro Vega 56 a higher texture rate of 280.0 GTexel/s versus the RX 5600M's 182.2 GTexel/s, though the pixel rates are nearly identical at 80.00 GPixel/s and 80.96 GPixel/s respectively. The FP32 throughput follows the same pattern, with the Pro Vega 56 delivering 8.960 TFLOPS against the RX 5600M's 5.829 TFLOPS.

Memory subsystems are a major differentiator. The Pro Vega 56 uses 8 GB of HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus, providing 402.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The RX 5600M uses 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, delivering 288.0 GB/s. The Pro Vega 56's memory bandwidth is 114.4 GB/s higher, which is critical for high-resolution textures and data-heavy compute loads. The RX 5600M compensates with a higher effective memory clock of 12 Gbps versus 1572 Mbps for the HBM2, but the narrower bus limits total throughput.

Clock speeds show the RX 5600M operating at a similar boost to the Pro Vega 56, with 1265 MHz versus 1250 MHz, but the base clocks differ, with the Pro Vega 56 at 1138 MHz and the RX 5600M at 1035 MHz. The RX 5600M also has a game clock of 1190 MHz, a metric the Pro Vega 56 lacks. Power consumption favors the newer part, with the RX 5600M rated at 150 W TDP compared to the Pro Vega 56's 210 W, a 60 W difference that matters in mobile chassis. Both use PCIe interfaces, but the RX 5600M supports PCIe 4.0 x16 while the Pro Vega 56 is limited to PCIe 3.0 x16.

API support is nearly identical, with both supporting DirectX 12 (12_1) and OpenGL 4.6. The RX 5600M supports Vulkan 1.4, while the Pro Vega 56 supports Vulkan 1.3, a minor version difference. The Pro Vega 56 offers dedicated display outputs with 1x HDMI 2.0b and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a, while the RX 5600M's outputs are listed as portable device dependent, reflecting its integration into laptops.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark data provides a clear picture of where each GPU excels. In Geekbench Metal, the RX 5600M posts a score of 76653, defeating the Pro Vega 56's 63145 by a margin of 17.6%. This is the largest win for either side, and it is significant because Metal is the primary GPU API for macOS and iOS applications. The Pro Vega 56, despite its higher compute throughput, falls behind in this specific test, likely due to the RDNA architecture's optimized Metal driver stack and instruction scheduling.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the Pro Vega 56 scores 61930 against the RX 5600M's 59589, a 3.9% win. The delta is modest, suggesting that both GPUs are capable in OpenCL workloads, but the Pro Vega 56's higher shading unit count and memory bandwidth provide a slight edge. This test likely exercises raw compute throughput, where the Pro Vega 56's 8.960 TFLOPS of FP32 performance is advantageous.

The Geekbench Vulkan test is the most lopsided result. The Pro Vega 56 achieves 66004, while the RX 5600M manages only 48843, a 35.1% deficit for the RX 5600M. This is a substantial gap that cannot be attributed to minor architectural tweaks. The Pro Vega 56's GCN architecture has mature Vulkan drivers, and its higher texture rate and memory bandwidth allow it to sustain higher fill rates and memory-intensive operations. The RX 5600M's Vulkan performance appears to be a weak point, despite its newer RDNA design.

When examining the nearest rivals from the database, the Pro Vega 56's average score of 63693 places it within 0.2% of the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT LP and the NVIDIA CMP 30HX, which score 63830 and 63842 respectively. This indicates that the Pro Vega 56 is competitive with much newer parts in synthetic average terms. The RX 5600M's average score of 46601 is closely matched by the Intel Arc A530M at 46614, with a 0% delta, and it sits 1.2% ahead of the NVIDIA RTX A2000. The RX 5600M's average is dragged down by its poor Vulkan showing, despite its impressive Metal result.

The Verdict

The data indicates that the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 is the stronger all-around performer for compute-heavy and Vulkan-based workloads. Its 35.1% lead in Geekbench Vulkan over the RX 5600M is the most decisive metric in this comparison, and its 3.9% OpenCL win reinforces its compute credentials. The Pro Vega 56 also has a higher average benchmark score, a higher percentile ranking, and double the memory bandwidth, making it the choice for users who prioritize raw throughput and memory-intensive tasks.

The AMD Radeon RX 5600M is the better option for users working within the Metal ecosystem. Its 17.6% advantage in Geekbench Metal over the Pro Vega 56 is a clear signal that it is optimized for Apple's API, and its lower 150 W TDP makes it more suitable for thinner, cooler mobile designs. For a laptop user running Metal-based creative software, the RX 5600M delivers better performance per watt in that specific context.

The architectural difference is stark: the Pro Vega 56 is a large, power-hungry chip with 12,500 million transistors on a 495 mm² die, while the RX 5600M is a compact, efficient part with 10,300 million transistors on a 251 mm² die. The Pro Vega 56's 114.4 GB/s higher memory bandwidth and 3.131 TFLOPS higher FP32 throughput are decisive in compute, but the RX 5600M's newer 7 nm process and PCIe 4.0 support offer modern connectivity. The choice ultimately depends on the target API and workload, with the Pro Vega 56 leading in OpenCL and Vulkan, and the RX 5600M leading in Metal.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 has an average benchmark score of 63693, while the AMD Radeon RX 5600M has an average of 46601, a difference of 17092 points.

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

A: In Geekbench Vulkan, the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 scores 66004 against the AMD Radeon RX 5600M's 48843, giving the Pro Vega 56 a 35.1% lead.

Q: Does the RX 5600M win any benchmark tests?

A: Yes, the AMD Radeon RX 5600M wins the Geekbench Metal test with a score of 76653, which is 17.6% higher than the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56's 63145.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 has 8 GB of HBM2 memory on a 2048-bit bus with 402.4 GB/s bandwidth, while the AMD Radeon RX 5600M has 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has a higher transistor density?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 5600M has a transistor density of 41.0M per mm² on a 7 nm process, while the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 has 25.3M per mm² on a 14 nm process.

Q: How do their TDP ratings compare?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 has a TDP of 210 W, while the AMD Radeon RX 5600M has a TDP of 150 W, making the RX 5600M more power-efficient on paper.