AMD Radeon PRO W7500 vs AMD Radeon RX 460 Comparison

The Verdict

The recorded data presents a clear generational and architectural split. The AMD Radeon RX 460, a 2016-era entry-level card, is entirely outclassed by the AMD Radeon PRO W7500 in every head-to-head benchmark available. The PRO W7500 wins both recorded comparisons, with a 69.3% lead in Geekbench OpenCL and a 70.6% lead in Geekbench Vulkan. For any workload represented by these compute-heavy tests, the PRO W7500 is the definitive choice.

The RX 460, however, is an end-of-life product with a 62nd percentile ranking among all GPUs, and its average benchmark score of 18,373 places it within 1.2% of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Mobile and within 0.1% of the Intel Arc A770M. The PRO W7500, while active and newer, holds a 59th percentile ranking, with an average score of 16,415. This places it in a different competitive bracket, directly adjacent to the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell (0% delta) and the AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT (0.3% delta). The data suggests that a buyer seeking maximum compute throughput in the tested APIs should select the PRO W7500, while the RX 460 is only relevant for legacy or extremely low-power scenarios where its smaller footprint and older interface might be acceptable.

Architecture Differences

The two cards represent entirely different eras of AMD GPU design. The RX 460 is built on the Baffin chip, utilizing the GCN 4.0 architecture, and belongs to the Arctic Islands (RX 400) generation. It is fabricated on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries, containing 3,000 million transistors on a 123 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 24.4M per mm². In contrast, the PRO W7500 uses the Navi 33 chip with the RDNA 3.0 architecture, part of the Radeon Pro Navi (Navi III Series) generation. It is built on a 6 nm process at TSMC, packing 13,300 million transistors into a 204 mm² die, achieving a density of 65.2M per mm².

The compute resources differ dramatically. The RX 460 has 896 shading units, 56 texture mapping units, and 16 render output units. The PRO W7500 doubles or triples these figures: 1,792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The PRO W7500 also features 28 ray tracing cores, a capability entirely absent from the RX 460. Clock speeds are also higher on the newer card, with a base of 1500 MHz and boost of 1700 MHz versus 1090 MHz base and 1200 MHz boost on the RX 460.

Memory configurations are starkly different. The RX 460 has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 112.0 GB/s of bandwidth with a memory clock of 1750 MHz (7 Gbps effective). The PRO W7500 has 8 GB of GDDR6 on the same 128-bit bus width, but achieves 256.0 GB/s due to a 2000 MHz memory clock (16 Gbps effective). The PRO W7500's pixel rate is 108.8 GPixel/s versus 19.20 GPixel/s for the RX 460, and its texture rate is 190.4 GTexel/s versus 67.20 GTexel/s. FP32 throughput is 12.19 TFLOPS versus 2.150 TFLOPS, with the PRO W7500 also offering FP16 at 24.37 TFLOPS (2:1 rate) compared to the RX 460's 2.150 TFLOPS (1:1 rate).

Interface and output capabilities also diverge. The RX 460 uses PCIe 3.0 x8 and outputs 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0b, and 1x DisplayPort 1.4a. The PRO W7500 uses PCIe 4.0 x8 and provides 4x DisplayPort 2.1. The RX 460 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The PRO W7500 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Physical dimensions differ: the RX 460 is 170 mm (6.7 inches) long and dual-slot, while the PRO W7500 is 216 mm (8.5 inches) long, 115 mm (4.5 inches) high, 20 mm (0.8 inches) wide, and single-slot. Both have a 75 W and 70 W TDP respectively, with no power connectors and a 250 W suggested PSU.

Where Each One Wins

Based strictly on the benchmark results, the PRO W7500 wins in every recorded compute workload. The Geekbench OpenCL score of 58,213 versus 17,855 shows a decisive advantage for the PRO W7500 in general-purpose GPU compute. The Geekbench Vulkan score of 68,634 versus 20,198 reinforces this, indicating superior performance in Vulkan-based applications, which are common in modern games and cross-platform compute. The PRO W7500 also has additional benchmark data not available for the RX 460, including PassMark DirectX 9 (200), DirectX 10 (65), DirectX 11 (125), DirectX 12 (46), G2D (1,174), G3D (13,368), and GPU Compute (5,910). These scores are not comparable directly to the RX 460, but they indicate a wide range of tested capabilities.

The RX 460 finds its only conceptual advantage in its age and simplicity. It is an end-of-life product with a smaller die and lower power draw (75 W), which might suit a legacy system with minimal power delivery. However, the data does not show any benchmark where the RX 460 outperforms the PRO W7500. The PRO W7500's higher memory capacity (8 GB versus 2 GB) and doubled bandwidth (256.0 GB/s versus 112.0 GB/s) make it the clear winner for texture-heavy and large-dataset workloads. The RX 460's 62nd percentile versus the PRO W7500's 59th percentile might suggest the older card is closer to the median GPU, but this is an average across all GPUs and does not reflect the head-to-head results.

FAQ

Q: Which card has more raw compute power in OpenCL?

A: The AMD Radeon PRO W7500 scores 58,213 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 69.3% higher than the RX 460's 17,855.

Q: How does the Vulkan performance compare?

A: The PRO W7500 scores 68,634 in Geekbench Vulkan, while the RX 460 scores 20,198. The PRO W7500 leads by 70.6%.

Q: What are the memory capacities and bandwidths?

A: The RX 460 has 2 GB of GDDR5 with 112.0 GB/s bandwidth. The PRO W7500 has 8 GB of GDDR6 with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Do both cards support modern APIs?

A: The RX 460 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The PRO W7500 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: Which card has ray tracing capability?

A: Only the PRO W7500, which features 28 ray tracing cores. The RX 460 has no ray tracing cores.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare to rivals?

A: The RX 460 averages 18,373, sitting 0.1% below the Intel Arc A770M and 1.2% above the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Mobile. The PRO W7500 averages 16,415, which is 0% different from the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell and 0.3% above the AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data is limited to two tests, but both show overwhelming dominance by the PRO W7500. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 460 scores 17,855, while the PRO W7500 scores 58,213. This is a delta of -69.3%, meaning the PRO W7500 delivers more than three times the OpenCL performance. This gap is consistent with the architectural differences: the PRO W7500 has double the shading units (1,792 versus 896), a much higher clock speed (1700 MHz boost versus 1200 MHz), and over five times the FP32 throughput (12.19 TFLOPS versus 2.150 TFLOPS). The memory bandwidth advantage (256.0 GB/s versus 112.0 GB/s) further amplifies compute workloads that are memory-bound.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the results are even more lopsided. The RX 460 scores 20,198, and the PRO W7500 scores 68,634, a delta of -70.6%. This test likely benefits from the PRO W7500's newer architecture and ray tracing cores, which can accelerate certain Vulkan-based rendering and compute tasks. The RX 460, with its GCN 4.0 architecture and lack of dedicated ray tracing hardware, cannot compete in this scenario. The 70.6% lead is nearly identical to the OpenCL lead, suggesting that the PRO W7500's advantage is broadly consistent across compute APIs, not specific to one implementation.

The RX 460's closest rival, based on average score, is the Intel Arc A770M at 18,383, a delta of -0.1%, and the AMD Radeon Pro 5700 at 18,189, a delta of 1%. The PRO W7500's nearest rival is the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell at 16,408 (0% delta) and the AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT at 16,361 (0.3% delta). This shows that while the PRO W7500 is far ahead of the RX 460, it is positioned oddly in the broader GPU landscape: its average score is lower than the RX 460's, despite winning the head-to-head. This discrepancy is explained by the different benchmark sets recorded for each card; the PRO W7500 includes PassMark scores that may drag its average down, while the RX 460 only has Geekbench scores, which are higher relative to its hardware.

For a buyer comparing these two directly, the data is unambiguous. The PRO W7500 wins both recorded compute benchmarks by a massive margin, offers more memory, faster bandwidth, and modern features like ray tracing and DisplayPort 2.1. The RX 460 is a legacy product with no recorded wins. The choice is clear for any workload that leverages OpenCL or Vulkan: the PRO W7500 is the superior card. The RX 460's only remaining role is as a historical reference point for early Polaris-era performance.