AMD Radeon R7 Graphics vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB Comparison

The AMD Radeon R7 Graphics and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB occupy the same 29th percentile in the database’s aggregate ranking, yet they represent opposite ends of the hardware spectrum. The R7 is a 2014 integrated graphics processor from AMD’s GCN 2.0 era, while the RTX 5060 Ti is a 2025 discrete Blackwell 2.0 part. Their average benchmark scores—4998 for the R7 and 4970 for the RTX 5060 Ti—are nearly identical, differing by just 0.6%, but the underlying workloads, architectures, and specifications could not be more divergent.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon R7 Graphics scores 4998 on average, slightly ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB’s 4970. The delta is a mere 0.6% in favor of the R7.

Q: How do the two compare in their nearest rival lists?

A: Each lists the other as a near rival. The R7’s nearest rivals include the NVIDIA Quadro 4000 (4979, +0.4%), AMD Radeon R5 M430 (5018, -0.4%), the RTX 5060 Ti (4970, +0.6%), and AMD FirePro W4170M (5034, -0.7%). The RTX 5060 Ti’s list includes the Quadro 4000 (4979, -0.2%), the R7 (4998, -0.6%), AMD Radeon R7 M360 (4931, +0.8%), and AMD Radeon R7 M265 (4929, +0.8%).

Q: What is the process node difference between the two?

A: The R7 is built on a 28 nm process at GlobalFoundries, while the RTX 5060 Ti uses a 5 nm process at TSMC. The RTX 5060 Ti packs 21,900 million transistors into a 181 mm² die (121.0M / mm²), versus the R7’s 2,410 million transistors on a 245 mm² die (9.8M / mm²).

Q: What are the available benchmark tests for each?

A: The R7 has only two entries: Geekbench OpenCL at 4015 and Geekbench Vulkan at 5980. The RTX 5060 Ti has eight entries, including 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 (4019), Passmark DirectX 10 (144), DirectX 11 (219), DirectX 12 (89), DirectX 9 (238), G2D (1206), G3D (22618), and GPU Compute (11224).

Q: Which GPU supports ray tracing and tensor cores?

A: Only the RTX 5060 Ti has these features, with 36 RT cores and 144 tensor cores. The R7 lists no RT cores or tensor cores in its specification, reflecting its older GCN 2.0 design without dedicated hardware for these workloads.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference?

A: The R7 uses system-shared memory with a system-dependent bus width and bandwidth. The RTX 5060 Ti has 16 GB of dedicated GDDR7 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap is generational. The R7 is based on GCN 2.0, a 28 nm design from GlobalFoundries, while the RTX 5060 Ti uses Blackwell 2.0 on TSMC’s 5 nm node. The transistor counts illustrate the scale: the R7 has 2,410 million transistors across a 245 mm² die, whereas the RTX 5060 Ti crams 21,900 million into just 181 mm²—a transistor density of 121.0M / mm² versus the R7’s 9.8M / mm².

Compute resources differ by an order of magnitude. The R7 has 384 shading units, 24 texture mapping units, and 8 ROPs. The RTX 5060 Ti has 4608 shading units, 144 TMUs, and 48 ROPs. The R7’s pixel rate is 5.760 GPixel/s with a texture rate of 17.28 GTexel/s; the RTX 5060 Ti reaches 123.5 GPixel/s and 370.4 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 553.0 GFLOPS for the R7 versus 23.70 TFLOPS for the RTX 5060 Ti, which also matches that figure in FP16 (1:1).

Feature support diverges sharply. The RTX 5060 Ti includes 36 RT cores and 144 tensor cores, enabling hardware-accelerated ray tracing and AI workloads. The R7 has neither. DirectX support is also differentiated: the R7 lists DirectX 12 (12_0), while the RTX 5060 Ti supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). Vulkan support is 1.2.170 on the R7 versus 1.4 on the RTX 5060 Ti. OpenGL is identical at 4.6.

Memory architecture is a fundamental split. The R7 relies on system-shared memory, with bandwidth described as “System Dependent.” The RTX 5060 Ti has 16 GB of GDDR7 on a 128-bit interface, delivering 448.0 GB/s. The R7’s memory clock is listed as “System Shared,” while the RTX 5060 Ti has a 1750 MHz base with 28 Gbps effective data rate.

Physical and power characteristics reflect their roles. The R7 is an IGP with 25 W TDP, no power connectors, and motherboard-dependent display outputs. The RTX 5060 Ti is a dual-slot card, 241 mm long, 111 mm tall, and 40 mm wide, with a 180 W TDP, a single 8-pin power connector, and a suggested 450 W PSU. It uses a PCIe 5.0 x8 interface; the R7 is built into the system as an IGP.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

There is no direct head-to-head benchmark suite shared between the two parts. The R7’s only results are Geekbench OpenCL (4015) and Geekbench Vulkan (5980). The RTX 5060 Ti’s results are entirely from Passmark and 3DMark, with no Geekbench entries. The closest comparable data point is the aggregate average, where the R7 leads by 28 points—4998 versus 4970—a 0.6% margin.

The RTX 5060 Ti’s Passmark G3D score of 22618 dwarfs any individual R7 result, but the R7’s Geekbench Vulkan score of 5980 is the single highest test number between the two. In the nearestRivals lists, the R7’s deltaPct against the RTX 5060 Ti is +0.6%, meaning the R7 is 0.6% ahead of the RTX 5060 Ti in average score. Conversely, the RTX 5060 Ti’s deltaPct against the R7 is -0.6%, confirming the same gap in the opposite direction.

The RTX 5060 Ti’s Passmark sub-scores reveal a mixed profile: DirectX 11 (219) and DirectX 9 (238) are higher than DirectX 12 (89), while GPU Compute sits at 11224 and G2D at 1206. The R7 has no Passmark entries, so cross-suite comparison is impossible. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 result of 4019 is close to the R7’s Geekbench OpenCL score of 4015, but these are different tests measuring different APIs.

Given the zero wins recorded in the headToHeadBenchmarks field for both sides, there is no single test where both GPUs produced a score. The data supports a statistical tie at the aggregate level—0.6% is within noise for most benchmark methodologies—but the workload composition is entirely different.

The Verdict

The data presents a paradox. By average benchmark score, the AMD Radeon R7 Graphics and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB are effectively equal, with the R7 edging ahead by 28 points (4998 vs 4970). Both sit at the 29th percentile of all GPUs, and each lists the other as a near rival within a 0.8% band. This suggests that the aggregate benchmark metric used here is not sensitive to the architectural differences between a 2014 IGP and a 2025 discrete card.

For the R7, the case is straightforward: it is an end-of-life integrated part with 384 shading units, 25 W TDP, and system-shared memory. Its strengths are limited to Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan, where it scores 4015 and 5980 respectively. It has no RT cores, no tensor cores, and no dedicated VRAM. Any user selecting the R7 is choosing an IGP for basic display and light compute, not for modern gaming or AI workloads.

The RTX 5060 Ti is the opposite: an active, dual-slot discrete GPU with 4608 shading units, 36 RT cores, 144 tensor cores, and 16 GB of GDDR7 at 448.0 GB/s. Its Passmark G3D score of 22618 is roughly 4.5 times the R7’s best single result, and its GPU Compute score of 11224 indicates substantial parallel processing capability. The 180 W TDP and 450 W suggested PSU reflect a high-performance part.

Who should pick which? Strictly from the data, the RTX 5060 Ti is the only choice for DirectX 12 Ultimate, ray tracing, tensor operations, or high-bandwidth memory workloads, as the R7 lacks those capabilities entirely. The R7’s only advantage is its 0.6% aggregate score lead and its 25 W TDP, which suits an IGP in a low-power system. There is no benchmark evidence that the R7 can match the RTX 5060 Ti in any modern 3D workload; the aggregate tie is an artifact of the scoring system, not a real performance equivalence.

Specification Differences

| Field | AMD Radeon R7 Graphics | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB |

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

| Architecture | GCN 2.0 | Blackwell 2.0 |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 5 nm |

| Transistors | 2,410 million | 21,900 million |

| Die Size | 245 mm² | 181 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 9.8M / mm² | 121.0M / mm² |

| Memory Size | System Shared | 16 GB |

| Memory Type | System Shared | GDDR7 |

| Memory Bus Width | System Shared | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | System Dependent | 448.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 384 | 4608 |

| TMUs | 24 | 144 |

| ROPs | 8 | 48 |

| RT Cores | N/A | 36 |

| Tensor Cores | N/A | 144 |

| Pixel Rate | 5.760 GPixel/s | 123.5 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 17.28 GTexel/s | 370.4 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 553.0 GFLOPS | 23.70 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | N/A | 23.70 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 25 W | 180 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | N/A | 1x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | N/A | 450 W |

| Bus Interface | IGP | PCIe 5.0 x8 |

| Display Outputs | Motherboard Dependent | 1x HDMI 2.1b, 3x DisplayPort 2.1b |

| DirectX | 12 (12_0) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |

| Vulkan | 1.2.170 | 1.4 |

| Production Status | End-of-life | Active |

| Release Date | 2014-02-16 | 2025-04-15 |

| Launch MSRP | N/A | 429 USD |

| Predecessor | TeraScale 3 IGP | GeForce 40 |

| Successor | GCN 3.0 IGP | GeForce 60 |