AMD Radeon R9 M295X vs AMD Radeon RX 560 XT Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a clear and consistent advantage for the AMD Radeon RX 560 XT across the two shared benchmark tests. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 560 XT scores 31,387 points against the R9 M295X's 22,858 points, a decisive 37.3% lead. This is not a marginal gap; it is a substantial performance differential that places the two cards in entirely different performance tiers despite both being AMD products from the same era.

The Vulkan results tell a similar story, though the margin narrows somewhat. The RX 560 XT posts 36,879 points in Geekbench Vulkan, while the R9 M295X manages 29,091 points. That 26.8% advantage still represents a clear win for the newer card, but the smaller delta suggests the R9 M295X's architecture handles Vulkan workloads relatively better than it does OpenCL, possibly due to driver maturity or workload characteristics. Still, the outcome is unambiguous: the RX 560 XT wins both head-to-head comparisons.

Looking at broader database averages, the RX 560 XT carries an average benchmark score of 34,133, placing it in the 79th percentile of all GPUs tracked. The R9 M295X, by contrast, averages 28,580, which lands in the 74th percentile. The 5-percentage-point gap in percentile ranking reflects the RX 560 XT's position among more modern parts, while the R9 M295X sits slightly lower despite its higher raw compute unit count. The nearest rivals for the RX 560 XT include the NVIDIA RTX A2000 12 GB (average score 34,154, a delta of -0.1%) and the NVIDIA RTX A1000 (average score 34,207, a delta of -0.2%), showing it trades blows with professional workstation cards. For the R9 M295X, the closest competitors are the AMD Radeon RX 570 (average score 28,766, delta -0.6%) and the AMD Radeon RX 6800M (average score 28,874, delta -1%), indicating it performs on par with mainstream desktop and mobile cards from later generations.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is significant and explains much of the performance disparity. The RX 560 XT is built on GCN 4.0 architecture, using the Ellesmere chip produced on GlobalFoundries' 14 nm process node. It packs 5,700 million transistors into a 232 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 24.6 million per square millimeter. The R9 M295X, on the other hand, uses the older GCN 3.0 architecture with the Amethyst chip, fabricated by TSMC on a 28 nm process. It contains 5,000 million transistors spread across a much larger 366 mm² die, giving it a lower density of 13.7 million per square millimeter. The RX 560 XT's smaller, denser die is a direct result of the process node advantage, allowing more transistors per area and generally better power efficiency.

Despite having fewer shading units, the RX 560 XT outperforms its rival. The R9 M295X features 2,048 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The RX 560 XT has 1,792 shading units and 112 TMUs, but also 32 ROPs. The newer card compensates for its lower unit counts with significantly higher clock speeds. The RX 560 XT runs at a base clock of 1074 MHz and boosts to 1226 MHz, while the R9 M295X has no recorded base or boost clocks in the database, though its memory runs at 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective) versus the RX 560 XT's 1750 MHz (7 Gbps effective). This clock advantage translates directly into throughput: the RX 560 XT achieves 39.23 GPixel/s pixel rate and 137.3 GTexel/s texture rate, while the R9 M295X manages only 23.14 GPixel/s and 92.54 GTexel/s respectively. In floating-point performance, the RX 560 XT delivers 4.394 TFLOPS FP32, against the R9 M295X's 2.961 TFLOPS, a 48% advantage.

Memory configurations are identical in capacity and bus width: both use 4 GB of GDDR5 over a 256-bit interface. However, the RX 560 XT's higher memory clock yields 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth, while the R9 M295X is limited to 160.0 GB/s. API support also differs slightly: both support DirectX 12 (12_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but the RX 560 XT supports Vulkan 1.3 while the R9 M295X tops out at Vulkan 1.2.170.

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 560 XT averages 34,133 points, compared to the R9 M295X's 28,580 points, a difference of roughly 5,553 points.

Q: How do the two cards compare in terms of transistor density?

A: The RX 560 XT has a transistor density of 24.6 million per square millimeter, nearly double the R9 M295X's 13.7 million per square millimeter, reflecting the newer 14 nm process versus the older 28 nm node.

Q: Which card has more shading units?

A: The R9 M295X has 2,048 shading units, which is 256 more than the RX 560 XT's 1,792 shading units. Despite this, the RX 560 XT still outperforms it in every recorded benchmark.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The RX 560 XT provides 224.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth, while the R9 M295X offers 160.0 GB/s, a 40% advantage for the newer card.

Q: Do both cards support the same API levels?

A: Both support DirectX 12 (12_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but the RX 560 XT supports Vulkan 1.3 while the R9 M295X is limited to Vulkan 1.2.170.

Q: What is the power consumption of each card?

A: The RX 560 XT has a TDP of 150 W, while the R9 M295X has a TDP of 250 W, meaning the newer card draws significantly less power while delivering higher performance.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every specification except memory size, memory type, bus width, ROP count, and manufacturer. The RX 560 XT uses the Ellesmere chip with GCN 4.0 architecture, a 14 nm process from GlobalFoundries, and contains 5,700 million transistors on a 232 mm² die. The R9 M295X uses the Amethyst chip with GCN 3.0 architecture, a 28 nm process from TSMC, and contains 5,000 million transistors on a 366 mm² die. The RX 560 XT has base and boost clocks of 1074 MHz and 1226 MHz, while the R9 M295X has no recorded base or boost clocks. Memory clocks differ substantially: 1750 MHz (7 Gbps effective) versus 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective). Bandwidth is 224.0 GB/s versus 160.0 GB/s. Shading units are 1,792 versus 2,048, and TMUs are 112 versus 128. Pixel rate is 39.23 GPixel/s versus 23.14 GPixel/s, and texture rate is 137.3 GTexel/s versus 92.54 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 4.394 TFLOPS versus 2.961 TFLOPS. TDP is 150 W versus 250 W. The RX 560 XT is dual-slot with a 1x 6-pin power connector and a suggested PSU of 450 W, while the R9 M295X is an MXM module with no power connectors and no suggested PSU. The RX 560 XT uses PCIe 3.0 x16 and has display outputs of 1x HDMI 2.0b and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a; the R9 M295X uses MXM-B (3.0) with portable-device-dependent outputs. The RX 560 XT is 241 mm (9.5 inches) long; the R9 M295X has no recorded dimensions. Release dates differ: March 2019 for the RX 560 XT versus November 2014 for the R9 M295X. Vulkan support is 1.3 versus 1.2.170.

The Verdict

The data points to a straightforward conclusion: the AMD Radeon RX 560 XT is the superior product by every measured metric. It wins both head-to-head benchmarks, holds a higher average score, ranks in a higher percentile, and achieves this with lower power consumption and a more modern manufacturing process. The R9 M295X, despite having more shading units and TMUs, cannot overcome its older architecture, lower clocks, and reduced memory bandwidth. The RX 560 XT's 37.3% lead in OpenCL and 26.8% lead in Vulkan are decisive margins that place it in a different performance class.

The only scenario where the R9 M295X might be preferable is in a system requiring an MXM form factor, since it is built as an MXM module while the RX 560 XT is a traditional dual-slot PCIe card. For any standard desktop build, the RX 560 XT is the clear choice. Its 79th percentile ranking versus the R9 M295X's 74th also suggests it will age better relative to future software demands. The RX 560 XT's 150 W TDP versus 250 W TDP further reinforces its efficiency advantage, making it easier to cool and power within a standard system.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon RX 560 XT wins in every benchmark category recorded. In Geekbench OpenCL, it leads by 8,529 points, a 37.3% margin that indicates strong compute performance for general-purpose workloads. In Geekbench Vulkan, it leads by 7,788 points, a 26.8% margin that shows robust graphics API performance. The RX 560 XT also wins on memory bandwidth (224.0 GB/s versus 160.0 GB/s), pixel rate (39.23 GPixel/s versus 23.14 GPixel/s), texture rate (137.3 GTexel/s versus 92.54 GTexel/s), and FP32 throughput (4.394 TFLOPS versus 2.961 TFLOPS). Its higher clock speeds and newer architecture give it an edge in virtually every workload type.

The R9 M295X does not win any recorded benchmark or specification comparison that impacts performance. Its only advantages are in raw hardware counts: 2,048 shading units versus 1,792, and 128 TMUs versus 112. However, these do not translate into any measured performance win. The R9 M295X's 28 nm process, lower memory clocks, and older GCN 3.0 architecture leave it behind in all practical scenarios. Its only potential use case is in a laptop or portable device requiring an MXM-B module, where the RX 560 XT cannot physically fit. For anyone comparing these two cards in a standard desktop context, the RX 560 XT is the definitive winner across the board.