AMD Radeon R9 M395X vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 and AMD Radeon R9 M395X represent two completely different eras of GPU design, and the benchmark data reflects that chasm clearly. The RTX 5060 is a modern desktop part built on a 5 nm process, while the R9 M395X is a legacy mobile module from 2015 on a 28 nm node. In the single head-to-head benchmark available, the Geekbench OpenCL test, the RTX 5060 scores 112787 against the R9 M395X’s 17829, a staggering 532.6% advantage. This is not a close contest; it is a generational obliteration.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only directly comparable benchmark between these two cards is Geekbench OpenCL, and the results are lopsided. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 delivers a score of 112787, while the AMD Radeon R9 M395X manages just 17829. That translates to a 532.6% delta in favor of the RTX 5060, meaning the modern card is roughly six times faster in this compute workload. The sheer magnitude of this gap is explained by the architectural and process differences: the RTX 5060’s 5 nm TSMC node versus the R9 M395X’s 28 nm TSMC node, and the RTX 5060’s 19.18 TFLOPS FP32 throughput against the R9 M395X’s 2.961 TFLOPS.

Beyond the single shared test, the broader benchmark suites tell the same story. The RTX 5060 posts an average benchmark score of 26331 across its ten recorded tests, spanning 3DMark Steel Nomad, Geekbench, and multiple Passmark DirectX versions. Its best individual result is 20891 in Passmark G3D, and it also shows strong compute performance with 10899 in Passmark GPU Compute. The R9 M395X only has two recorded benchmarks — Geekbench Metal at 33953 and Geekbench OpenCL at 17829 — giving it an average score of 25891. While the average scores are close (26331 vs 25891), that is misleading: the R9 M395X’s Metal score is from Apple’s proprietary API, which is not comparable to the RTX 5060’s cross-platform tests, and the OpenCL result shows the RTX 5060 is over five times faster.

In the head-to-head tally, the RTX 5060 wins the sole contest (1 win, 0 losses). The nearest rivals data reinforces the RTX 5060’s positioning: it sits within 1.2% of the AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT and within 0.8% of the RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary, while the R9 M395X is similarly close to the AMD FirePro W7100 (0.1% delta) and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Mobile (0.6% delta). This means the RTX 5060 competes with mid-range desktop cards from a few generations ago, while the R9 M395X trades blows with workstation and older mobile parts.

FAQ

Q: Why is the Geekbench OpenCL score so much higher for the RTX 5060?

A: The RTX 5060 has 3840 shading units, 120 texture mapping units, and 48 render output units, compared to the R9 M395X’s 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. Combined with a boost clock of 2497 MHz versus the R9 M395X’s unspecified clocks, the RTX 5060 achieves 19.18 TFLOPS FP32, which is 6.5 times the R9 M395X’s 2.961 TFLOPS. That raw compute advantage directly drives the 532.6% OpenCL delta.

Q: Are these cards comparable in terms of memory bandwidth?

A: No. The RTX 5060 uses 8 GB of GDDR7 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The R9 M395X also has 8 GB, but it is GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, providing only 160.0 GB/s. Despite having half the bus width, the RTX 5060’s newer memory technology gives it 2.8 times the bandwidth.

Q: Which card has better API support for modern games?

A: The RTX 5060 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), Vulkan 1.4, and OpenGL 4.6. The R9 M395X is limited to DirectX 12 (12_0), Vulkan 1.2.170, and OpenGL 4.6. The RTX 5060’s newer DirectX feature level and more recent Vulkan version mean it is better suited for current and upcoming titles that leverage advanced rendering features.

Q: Is the R9 M395X still relevant for any workload?

A: The data suggests limited relevance. Its only competitive result is in Geekbench Metal (33953), which is an Apple-specific API, and that score is not comparable to the RTX 5060’s results. In OpenCL, it is decisively slower. Its production status is “End-of-life,” and its 2.961 TFLOPS FP32 is roughly 15% of the RTX 5060’s throughput.

Q: How do these cards compare in power consumption?

A: The RTX 5060 has a TDP of 145 W with a suggested 300 W PSU and a single 8-pin connector. The R9 M395X has a TDP of only 75 W and no power connectors, as it is an MXM module for portable devices. The RTX 5060 uses more power, but it delivers far more performance per watt given the massive benchmark gap.

Q: What do the percentile rankings mean?

A: The RTX 5060 is in the 72nd percentile of all GPUs, while the R9 M395X is in the 71st percentile. This is surprisingly close, but it reflects the fact that the R9 M395X’s average is propped up by its Metal score, which is not a cross-platform metric. In practical cross-platform terms, the RTX 5060 is vastly superior.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is the primary driver of their performance disparity. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 uses the Blackwell 2.0 architecture on a 5 nm TSMC process, packing 21,900 million transistors into a 181 mm² die, for a transistor density of 121.0 million per mm². It features 30 RT cores and 120 tensor cores, enabling hardware-accelerated ray tracing and AI workloads, which the R9 M395X lacks entirely. Its 3840 shading units and 120 TMUs are arranged in a modern streaming multiprocessor design optimized for high clock speeds.

The AMD Radeon R9 M395X, by contrast, uses the GCN 3.0 architecture on a 28 nm TSMC process, with 5,000 million transistors on a much larger 366 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of just 13.7 million per mm². It has 2048 shading units and 128 TMUs, but no RT or tensor cores. The GCN architecture was designed for compute-heavy workloads of its era, but it lacks the scalar optimization and hardware feature set of modern GPUs. The node difference (5 nm vs 28 nm) alone explains a significant portion of the efficiency and clock speed gap: the RTX 5060 boosts to 2497 MHz, while the R9 M395X’s clock speeds are not even listed because they are variable in portable devices.

The memory subsystems also reflect different design philosophies. The RTX 5060 uses GDDR7 with a 128-bit bus, achieving 448.0 GB/s, while the R9 M395X uses GDDR5 with a 256-bit bus, achieving only 160.0 GB/s. The RTX 5060’s narrower bus is compensated by much faster memory, and its PCIe 5.0 x8 interface provides more bandwidth than the R9 M395X’s PCIe 3.0 x16. The RTX 5060 also supports modern display outputs (HDMI 2.1b, DisplayPort 2.1b), whereas the R9 M395X’s outputs are “portable device dependent.”

Specification Differences

The key specification differences between the two cards are stark:

• Process node: 5 nm (TSMC) for the RTX 5060 vs 28 nm (TSMC) for the R9 M395X.
• Transistors: 21,900 million vs 5,000 million.
• Die size: 181 mm² vs 366 mm².
• Shading units: 3840 vs 2048.
• TMUs: 120 vs 128.
• ROPs: 48 vs 32.
• RT cores: 30 vs 0 (none).
• Tensor cores: 120 vs 0 (none).
• FP32 performance: 19.18 TFLOPS vs 2.961 TFLOPS.
• Pixel rate: 119.9 GPixel/s vs 23.14 GPixel/s.
• Texture rate: 299.6 GTexel/s vs 92.54 GTexel/s.
• Memory type: GDDR7 vs GDDR5.
• Memory bus width: 128 bit vs 256 bit.
• Memory bandwidth: 448.0 GB/s vs 160.0 GB/s.
• TDP: 145 W vs 75 W.
• Slot width: Dual-slot vs MXM Module.
• Power connector: 1x 8-pin vs None.
• Bus interface: PCIe 5.0 x8 vs PCIe 3.0 x16.
• DirectX version: 12 Ultimate (12_2) vs 12 (12_0).
• Vulkan version: 1.4 vs 1.2.170.
• Production status: Active vs End-of-life.
• Release date: 2025-05-18 vs 2015-05-04.

The RTX 5060 also has a launch MSRP of 299 USD, while the R9 M395X has no recorded launch MSRP.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 is the superior product by every measurable metric. It wins the only head-to-head benchmark by 532.6%, has roughly 6.5 times the FP32 throughput, 2.8 times the memory bandwidth, and supports modern APIs like DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4. The R9 M395X, with its 28 nm GCN 3.0 architecture and 2015 release date, is a legacy part that cannot compete in any cross-platform workload. The RTX 5060’s percentile ranking (72nd) is slightly higher than the R9 M395X’s (71st), but that parity is an artifact of the R9 M395X’s Metal score, which does not translate to Windows or Linux performance.

For anyone choosing between these two, the RTX 5060 is the only rational choice for gaming, content creation, or compute tasks. The R9 M395X is end-of-life, lacks hardware ray tracing, and its 75 W TDP is irrelevant because it is a mobile MXM module, not a desktop card. The RTX 5060’s 145 W TDP is modest for a desktop GPU and fits in a dual-slot design with a single 8-pin connector.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 wins in every practical category. It wins in raw compute (OpenCL score 112787 vs 17829), in memory bandwidth (448.0 GB/s vs 160.0 GB/s), in pixel fill rate (119.9 GPixel/s vs 23.14 GPixel/s), and in texture fill rate (299.6 GTexel/s vs 92.54 GTexel/s). It wins in feature support with RT cores, tensor cores, and DirectX 12 Ultimate. It wins in connectivity with PCIe 5.0 and modern display outputs. It wins in efficiency, delivering 19.18 TFLOPS at 145 W versus the R9 M395X’s 2.961 TFLOPS at 75 W — a 6.5x performance advantage for less than double the power draw.

The AMD Radeon R9 M395X has exactly one niche where it does not lose outright: its Geekbench Metal score of 33953 is its only recorded benchmark where it exceeds its OpenCL result, suggesting it was optimized for Apple’s ecosystem. However, the RTX 5060 has no Metal benchmark data, so a direct comparison is impossible. In every cross-platform test, the R9 M395X is decisively beaten. For a builder in 2025, the R9 M395X is a historical artifact, while the RTX 5060 is a current, active product that sits within 1.2% of the AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT and within 0.8% of the RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary in its nearest rival grouping. The choice is not a choice at all.