AMD Radeon PRO W6400 vs AMD Radeon RX 560 XT Comparison

The AMD Radeon PRO W6400 and the AMD Radeon RX 560 XT are both end-of-life graphics cards, but they represent very different design philosophies. The PRO W6400 is built on RDNA 2.0 with a 6 nm process, while the RX 560 XT uses GCN 4.0 on 14 nm. Despite this generational gap, both cards sit at the 78th percentile among all GPUs in the database, and their average benchmark scores are within 0.2% of each other.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

In the only direct benchmark shared by both cards, Geekbench OpenCL, the PRO W6400 scores 34,511 against the RX 560 XT's 31,387, a 10% advantage. This places the PRO W6400 0.2% above the RX 560 XT in average score (34,511 vs 34,427) and just 0.1% below the AMD Radeon HD 7970 (34,541). The PRO W6400 also sits 0.5% above the NVIDIA TITAN V (34,355) and 0.5% below the NVIDIA Quadro GV100 (34,677). For the RX 560 XT, its average of 34,427 is 0.2% below the PRO W6400, 0.3% below the HD 7970, and 0.7% below the Quadro GV100, while being 0.2% above the TITAN V.

The RX 560 XT also reports a Geekbench Vulkan score of 37,467, which is higher than its own OpenCL score and higher than the PRO W6400's OpenCL score. However, no Vulkan result is listed for the PRO W6400, so a direct Vulkan comparison cannot be made from the data. The RX 560 XT's average score is pulled up by that Vulkan figure, yet it still trails the PRO W6400's OpenCL-only average by 0.2%. In the single measurable head-to-head, the PRO W6400 wins decisively.

Architecture Differences

The two cards are built on fundamentally different architectures. The PRO W6400 uses the Navi 24 chip on TSMC's 6 nm process, with 5,400 million transistors packed into a 107 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 50.5M/mm². The RX 560 XT uses the Ellesmere chip on GlobalFoundries' 14 nm process, with 5,700 million transistors on a 232 mm² die, giving a density of 24.6M/mm². The PRO W6400 is RDNA 2.0, supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, and includes 12 ray-tracing cores. The RX 560 XT is GCN 4.0, supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3, and has no ray-tracing hardware.

The PRO W6400's FP16 throughput is 7.130 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio, while the RX 560 XT delivers 4.394 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio. The PRO W6400 also achieves a higher pixel rate (74.27 GP/s vs 39.23 GP/s) despite having a lower texture rate (111.4 GT/s vs 137.3 GT/s). The PRO W6400's memory runs at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) on a 64-bit bus, while the RX 560 XT uses 1750 MHz (7 Gbps effective) on a 256-bit bus. The PRO W6400's base and boost clocks are 2039 MHz and 2321 MHz, respectively, compared to 1074 MHz and 1226 MHz for the RX 560 XT.

Where Each One Wins

In the only shared benchmark, the PRO W6400 wins outright with a 10% higher OpenCL score. It also leads in average benchmark score by 0.2% (34,511 vs 34,427). The RX 560 XT counters with a Vulkan score of 37,467, but since the PRO W6400 has no recorded Vulkan result, this cannot be counted as a win. The RX 560 XT offers higher FP32 compute (4.394 TFLOPS vs 3.565 TFLOPS) and higher texture rate (137.3 GT/s vs 111.4 GT/s), but these are specifications, not benchmark results. The PRO W6400's 50 W TDP versus 150 W gives it a clear advantage in power-constrained environments, and its single-slot design with no power connectors contrasts with the RX 560 XT's dual-slot layout and 6-pin connector.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every major specification. Process node: 6 nm (TSMC) vs 14 nm (GlobalFoundries). Architecture: RDNA 2.0 vs GCN 4.0. Transistors: 5,400M vs 5,700M. Die size: 107 mm² vs 232 mm². Transistor density: 50.5M/mm² vs 24.6M/mm². Base clock: 2039 MHz vs 1074 MHz. Boost clock: 2321 MHz vs 1226 MHz. Memory clock: 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) vs 1750 MHz (7 Gbps effective). Memory type: GDDR6 vs GDDR5. Bus width: 64-bit vs 256-bit. Bandwidth: 128.0 GB/s vs 224.0 GB/s. Shading units: 768 vs 1792. TMUs: 48 vs 112. RT cores: 12 vs none. Pixel rate: 74.27 GP/s vs 39.23 GP/s. Texture rate: 111.4 GT/s vs 137.3 GT/s. FP32: 3.565 TFLOPS vs 4.394 TFLOPS. FP16: 7.130 TFLOPS (2:1) vs 4.394 TFLOPS (1:1). TDP: 50 W vs 150 W. Slot width: Single-slot vs Dual-slot. Power connectors: None vs 1x 6-pin. Suggested PSU: 250 W vs 450 W. Bus interface: PCIe 4.0 x4 vs PCIe 3.0 x16. Display outputs: 2x DisplayPort 1.4a vs 1x HDMI 2.0b + 3x DisplayPort 1.4a. DirectX: 12 Ultimate (12_2) vs 12 (12_0). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.3. Release date: 2022-01-18 vs 2019-03-12. Predecessor: Radeon Pro Vega vs Arctic Islands. Successor: none vs Vega. The RX 560 XT is 241 mm long (9.5 inches); the PRO W6400's length is not listed.

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher Geekbench OpenCL score?

A: The PRO W6400, with 34,511 versus 31,387 for the RX 560 XT, a 10% difference.

Q: Does the RX 560 XT have any benchmark advantage?

A: It reports a Vulkan score of 37,467, but no Vulkan score is available for the PRO W6400, so no direct comparison can be made.

Q: Which card supports ray tracing?

A: The PRO W6400 has 12 RT cores; the RX 560 XT has none.

Q: Which card has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The RX 560 XT, with 224.0 GB/s on a 256-bit bus, versus 128.0 GB/s on a 64-bit bus for the PRO W6400.

Q: Which card is more power efficient?

A: The PRO W6400 has a 50 W TDP and no power connectors, while the RX 560 XT has a 150 W TDP and requires a 6-pin connector.

Q: Which card has a higher transistor density?

A: The PRO W6400 at 50.5M/mm² versus 24.6M/mm² for the RX 560 XT.

The Verdict

Based on the available data, the AMD Radeon PRO W6400 is the stronger choice for OpenCL workloads, winning the only shared benchmark by 10% and leading in average score by 0.2%. It also brings modern RDNA 2.0 features, ray tracing, DirectX 12 Ultimate, and a much lower power envelope. The RX 560 XT offers higher raw FP32 throughput and memory bandwidth, but those do not translate into a benchmark win in the recorded tests. If Vulkan performance is critical, the RX 560 XT's 37,467 score is notable, but without a comparable PRO W6400 result, it cannot be recommended as a decisive advantage. For users prioritizing efficiency, modern API support, and proven OpenCL performance, the PRO W6400 is the data-supported pick. The RX 560 XT remains a viable option for those who need higher texture rate and memory bandwidth, but it loses the only head-to-head comparison.