AMD Radeon Pro W5700 vs AMD Radeon R9 M295X Comparison

The Verdict

The recorded data separates these two AMD GPUs cleanly. The AMD Radeon Pro W5700 wins every benchmark in the head-to-head comparison, and by a wide margin. The Radeon R9 M295X holds a higher percentile ranking against all GPUs at 74, versus 71 for the Pro W5700, but that reflects the older card's position in a database with fewer modern entries. The R9 M295X's average benchmark score is 28580, while the Pro W5700 averages 25726, a gap driven by the Pro W5700's inclusion of DirectX 9, 10, 11, and 12 Passmark tests, which pull its average down. In pure compute and graphics API workloads, the Pro W5700 dominates.

For users running Metal, OpenCL, or Vulkan workloads, the Pro W5700 is the clear choice. Its Geekbench scores are roughly 2.4 to 3.3 times higher than the R9 M295X. The R9 M295X, a mobile MXM module from 2014, is end-of-life and suited only for legacy systems where its 4 GB GDDR5 frame buffer and GCN 3.0 feature set are acceptable. The Pro W5700, also end-of-life but from 2019, offers 8 GB GDDR6, a 7 nm process, and PCIe 4.0, making it the more capable part for modern software.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different eras of AMD design. The R9 M295X uses the Amethyst chip built on GCN 3.0 architecture, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It packs 5,000 million transistors onto a 366 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 13.7M per mm². The Pro W5700 uses the Navi 10 chip with RDNA 1.0 architecture, also built at TSMC but on a 7 nm process. That node allows 10,300 million transistors on a smaller 251 mm² die, with a density of 41.0M per mm². The Pro W5700 carries more than twice the transistor count in roughly two-thirds the die area.

Memory configurations differ significantly. The R9 M295X has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, with memory clocked at 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective), producing 160.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Pro W5700 doubles the capacity to 8 GB of GDDR6, also on a 256-bit bus, but memory runs at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective), yielding 448.0 GB/s. That is 2.8 times the bandwidth of the older card.

Compute resources scale up on the newer part. The R9 M295X has 2048 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The Pro W5700 has 2304 shading units, 144 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. Clock speeds are far higher on the Pro W5700: the R9 M295X lists no base or boost clock, while the Pro W5700 runs at 1400 MHz base and 1880 MHz boost. Pixel rate jumps from 23.14 GPixel/s to 120.3 GPixel/s, and texture rate from 92.54 GTexel/s to 270.7 GTexel/s. FP32 throughput rises from 2.961 TFLOPS to 8.663 TFLOPS. FP16 also differs: the R9 M295X delivers 2.961 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, while the Pro W5700 reaches 17.33 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio, indicating packed math support.

The Pro W5700 supports newer APIs: DirectX 12_1 versus 12_0, and Vulkan 1.4 versus 1.2.170. OpenGL is 4.6 on both. Power and physical design diverge sharply. The R9 M295X is an MXM module with a 250 W TDP and no power connectors, made for portable devices with device-dependent display outputs. The Pro W5700 is a dual-slot card, 267 mm long and 111 mm tall, with a 205 W TDP, requiring one 6-pin and one 8-pin power connector and a 550 W suggested PSU. It uses a PCIe 4.0 x16 interface and offers 5x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a plus 1x USB Type-C outputs.

Where Each One Wins

The Pro W5700 wins all three head-to-head benchmarks: Geekbench Metal, OpenCL, and Vulkan. The R9 M295X has no recorded wins in the comparison. In Metal, the Pro W5700 scores 89557 against 33790, a 62.3% advantage. In OpenCL, the Pro W5700 scores 74613 against 22858, a 69.4% lead. In Vulkan, the Pro W5700 scores 70706 against 29091, a 58.9% margin.

The R9 M295X's nearest rivals in the database are the NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000 (avg score 28421, 0.6% behind the R9 M295X), the AMD Radeon RX 570 (28766, 0.6% ahead), the AMD Radeon RX 6800M (28874, 1% ahead), and the AMD Radeon RX 470 (28996, 1.4% ahead). The Pro W5700's nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Mobile (25740, 0.1% ahead), the AMD Radeon RX 6700M (25633, 0.4% behind), the AMD FirePro D700 (25842, 0.4% ahead), and the AMD FirePro W7100 (25856, 0.5% ahead). The Pro W5700 sits in a performance tier roughly comparable to a mobile RTX 3080 Ti, while the R9 M295X lands near desktop RX 470/570 class parts.

For users of older DirectX 9, 10, or 11 applications, the Pro W5700's Passmark scores provide reference points: DirectX 9 at 225, DirectX 10 at 88, DirectX 11 at 104, DirectX 12 at 54, G2D at 899, G3D at 14520, and GPU compute at 6495. No comparable Passmark data exists for the R9 M295X, so the older card's legacy API performance cannot be directly quantified from the database.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in Geekbench Metal?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro W5700 scores 89557 versus 33790 for the R9 M295X, a 62.3% advantage for the Pro W5700.

Q: How much memory bandwidth does each card offer?

A: The R9 M295X provides 160.0 GB/s from 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus. The Pro W5700 provides 448.0 GB/s from 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus.

Q: Are both cards still in production?

A: No. Both are marked end-of-life in the database. The R9 M295X was released on 2014-11-22, and the Pro W5700 on 2019-11-18.

Q: What is the FP32 compute throughput of each?

A: The R9 M295X delivers 2.961 TFLOPS. The Pro W5700 delivers 8.663 TFLOPS, roughly 2.9 times higher.

Q: Do these cards support the same DirectX version?

A: No. The R9 M295X supports DirectX 12 (12_0), while the Pro W5700 supports DirectX 12 (12_1). OpenGL is 4.6 on both.

Q: Which card has a higher pixel rate?

A: The Pro W5700 reaches 120.3 GPixel/s, while the R9 M295X is limited to 23.14 GPixel/s. The Pro W5700 also has 64 ROPs versus 32 on the R9 M295X.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Geekbench Metal test shows the largest absolute gap. The Pro W5700 posts 89557, while the R9 M295X manages 33790. That is a 55767-point difference, or a 62.3% deficit for the older card. The Pro W5700's score is consistent with its higher shading unit count, doubled ROPs, and much faster memory subsystem. Metal workloads often stress bandwidth and pixel throughput, both areas where the Pro W5700 holds a large lead.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the Pro W5700 scores 74613 against 22858 for the R9 M295X, a 69.4% gap. This is the largest percentage difference of the three tests. OpenCL compute tasks scale with FP32 throughput and memory bandwidth. The Pro W5700's 8.663 TFLOPS and 448.0 GB/s dwarf the R9 M295X's 2.961 TFLOPS and 160.0 GB/s, explaining the result. The R9 M295X's FP16 performance equals its FP32 at 2.961 TFLOPS, but the Pro W5700 offers 17.33 TFLOPS FP16, which may further accelerate mixed-precision OpenCL kernels.

Geekbench Vulkan shows the Pro W5700 at 70706 versus 29091, a 58.9% lead. Vulkan performance depends on driver efficiency, command buffer throughput, and raw compute. The Pro W5700's newer RDNA 1.0 architecture and Vulkan 1.4 support (versus 1.2.170 on the R9 M295X) likely contribute to its advantage. The R9 M295X's GCN 3.0 architecture, while capable in its era, lacks the scheduling improvements and higher clock speeds of Navi 10.

The R9 M295X's average benchmark score of 28580 places it slightly above the Quadro RTX 8000 (28421) and below the RX 570 (28766), RX 6800M (28874), and RX 470 (28996). Those deltas are all within 1.4%, indicating the R9 M295X sits in a tight cluster of mid-range desktop and mobile parts. The Pro W5700's average of 25726 is dragged down by its Passmark DirectX results, which include low scores like 54 for DirectX 12 and 88 for DirectX 10. Its nearest rivals, the RTX 3080 Ti Mobile (25740) and RX 6700M (25633), are within 0.4%, showing that the Pro W5700's Geekbench strengths do not translate into a higher overall average once legacy DirectX tests are included.

The database records 0 wins for the R9 M295X and 3 wins for the Pro W5700 in the head-to-head set. That is a clean sweep. For any workload represented by Geekbench Metal, OpenCL, or Vulkan, the Pro W5700 is the superior part. The R9 M295X's only advantage lies in its smaller form factor as an MXM module, which suits portable devices, and its lower transistor density requirement on a mature 28 nm node. But in raw performance metrics, the comparison is one-sided.

The Pro W5700's launch MSRP is 799 USD. No launch MSRP is recorded for the R9 M295X. The Pro W5700 also requires a 550 W suggested PSU and dual-slot clearance, while the R9 M295X draws more power (250 W TDP versus 205 W) but fits in an MXM slot with no external connectors. The R9 M295X's display outputs are portable-device dependent, whereas the Pro W5700 provides five mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs and one USB Type-C port, making it more flexible for multi-monitor workstation setups. The R9 M295X's predecessor is listed as Solar System and its successor as Polaris Mobile, while the Pro W5700's predecessor is Radeon Pro Vega with no successor recorded.