AMD Radeon RX 5300M vs NVIDIA GRID M60-1Q Comparison

FAQ

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in raw compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA GRID M60-1Q has a higher peak FP32 throughput at 4.825 TFLOPS, while the AMD Radeon RX 5300M reaches 4.069 TFLOPS. The NVIDIA card also posts a higher pixel rate (75.39 GPixel/s vs 46.24 GPixel/s) and texture rate (150.8 GTexel/s vs 127.2 GTexel/s).

Q: Which card has better memory bandwidth?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 5300M slightly edges out the NVIDIA GRID M60-1Q in memory bandwidth, with 168.0 GB/s versus 160.4 GB/s. However, the NVIDIA card uses a wider 256-bit bus compared to AMD's 96-bit bus, but AMD compensates with faster GDDR6 memory running at 14 Gbps effective versus the NVIDIA's GDDR5 at 5 Gbps effective.

Q: How do their benchmark scores compare?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 5300M scored 36,529 in Geekbench OpenCL, placing it in the 80th percentile of all GPUs. The NVIDIA GRID M60-1Q scored 31,220 in Geekbench Vulkan, placing it in the 76th percentile. Note that these are different benchmark tests, so direct comparison is limited.

Q: What are the architectural differences between the two?

A: The AMD card uses RDNA 1.0 architecture on a 7 nm process with 6,400 million transistors on a 158 mm² die. The NVIDIA card uses Maxwell 2.0 architecture on a 28 nm process with 5,200 million transistors on a much larger 398 mm² die. The transistor density differs significantly: 40.5M per mm² for AMD versus 13.1M per mm² for NVIDIA.

Q: Which card consumes more power?

A: The NVIDIA GRID M60-1Q has a TDP of 225 W and requires a 550 W power supply, while the AMD Radeon RX 5300M has a TDP of 85 W and uses no power connectors. The NVIDIA card is dual-slot and 267 mm long, whereas the AMD card has no specified slot width or dimensions.

Q: What is the production status of these GPUs?

A: Both GPUs are end-of-life products. The AMD Radeon RX 5300M was released on November 12, 2019, while the NVIDIA GRID M60-1Q was released earlier on August 29, 2015.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon RX 5300M is built on RDNA 1.0 architecture using TSMC's 7 nm process node. This is a significant manufacturing advantage over the NVIDIA GRID M60-1Q, which uses the older Maxwell 2.0 architecture on a 28 nm process. The process node difference is stark: 7 nm versus 28 nm, resulting in vastly different transistor densities. AMD packs 6,400 million transistors into a 158 mm² die, achieving a density of 40.5 million transistors per square millimeter. NVIDIA's GM204 chip contains 5,200 million transistors spread across a much larger 398 mm² die, yielding only 13.1 million transistors per square millimeter.

The memory subsystems differ in fundamental ways. The AMD card uses 3 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 96-bit bus, with memory clocked at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective). The NVIDIA card uses 1 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus, with memory clocked at 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective). Despite the wider bus on the NVIDIA card, the AMD card achieves slightly higher bandwidth (168.0 GB/s versus 160.4 GB/s) thanks to the faster GDDR6 technology.

Core configuration also differs considerably. The AMD card has 1,408 shading units, 88 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The NVIDIA card has more shading units at 2,048, more TMUs at 128, and double the ROPs at 64. This explains why the NVIDIA card achieves higher pixel and texture rates despite lower clock speeds. The AMD card runs at a base clock of 1000 MHz and boost clock of 1445 MHz, with a game clock of 1181 MHz. The NVIDIA card has a much lower base clock of 557 MHz but boosts to 1178 MHz. Neither card has ray tracing cores or tensor cores.

Both cards support DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The AMD card uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface, while the NVIDIA card uses PCIe 3.0 x16. The AMD card has portable device dependent display outputs, whereas the NVIDIA card has no display outputs at all, reflecting its intended use as a server or virtualization GPU.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results between these two GPUs, and the win count is zero for both cards. However, each card has its own benchmark score from different test suites, which provides some comparative insight.

The AMD Radeon RX 5300M scored 36,529 in Geekbench OpenCL, placing it in the 80th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals provide context for this score. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN X scores nearly identically at 36,530, a delta of 0 percent. The AMD Radeon PRO W6400 scores higher at 37,157, putting the RX 5300M 1.7 percent behind. The NVIDIA T1000 scores 36,289, which is 0.7 percent lower than the RX 5300M. The AMD Radeon Pro Duo scores 35,860, placing the RX 5300M 1.9 percent ahead.

The NVIDIA GRID M60-1Q scored 31,220 in Geekbench Vulkan, placing it in the 76th percentile. Its nearest rivals show a different competitive landscape. The NVIDIA Quadro M5000 scores nearly identically at 31,206, a delta of 0 percent. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER scores 31,087, which is 0.4 percent lower. The NVIDIA RTX PRO 4500 Blackwell scores higher at 31,532, putting the GRID M60-1Q 1 percent behind. The NVIDIA TITAN RTX scores 31,676, placing the GRID M60-1Q 1.4 percent behind.

When interpreting these scores, the percentile difference is meaningful. The AMD card sits in the 80th percentile versus the NVIDIA card's 76th percentile, indicating that the AMD card outperforms a slightly larger fraction of the GPU population in its respective benchmark. The raw score difference is also notable: 36,529 versus 31,220, a gap of approximately 5,309 points. However, these are different benchmark tests, so the comparison should be treated with caution.

The benchmark results suggest that the AMD Radeon RX 5300M delivers competitive raw compute performance for a mobile GPU, particularly given its much lower power envelope. The NVIDIA GRID M60-1Q, despite having higher theoretical FP32 throughput and more shading units, scores lower in its benchmark, which may reflect its older architecture, lower clock speeds, and the nature of the Vulkan test compared to OpenCL.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every specification category. The process node is the most dramatic difference: the AMD card uses 7 nm technology while the NVIDIA card uses 28 nm. This leads to a transistor density of 40.5 million per square millimeter for AMD versus 13.1 million for NVIDIA, despite the AMD card having more transistors overall (6,400 million versus 5,200 million). The die size tells the story: AMD's 158 mm² versus NVIDIA's 398 mm².

Memory configuration differs in capacity, type, bus width, and clock speed. The AMD card has 3 GB of GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus with 1750 MHz memory clock (14 Gbps effective). The NVIDIA card has 1 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 1253 MHz memory clock (5 Gbps effective). Bandwidth is close: 168.0 GB/s for AMD versus 160.4 GB/s for NVIDIA.

Core counts differ substantially. The NVIDIA card has more shading units (2,048 versus 1,408), more TMUs (128 versus 88), and more ROPs (64 versus 32). The AMD card has higher clock speeds: base 1000 MHz versus 557 MHz, boost 1445 MHz versus 1178 MHz, and a game clock of 1181 MHz for AMD while NVIDIA has no game clock listed.

Power characteristics are vastly different. The AMD card has a TDP of 85 W with no power connectors required. The NVIDIA card has a TDP of 225 W, requires a single 8-pin power connector, and needs a 550 W power supply. The NVIDIA card is dual-slot and measures 267 mm (10.5 inches) in length, while the AMD card has no listed dimensions.

The bus interface differs: PCIe 4.0 x8 for AMD versus PCIe 3.0 x16 for NVIDIA. Display outputs also differ: the AMD card is portable device dependent, while the NVIDIA card has no outputs. The AMD card supports FP16 at 8.138 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio), while the NVIDIA card has no FP16 capability listed. The AMD card achieves 46.24 GPixel/s pixel rate and 127.2 GTexel/s texture rate, while the NVIDIA card achieves 75.39 GPixel/s and 150.8 GTexel/s.

The Verdict

The data presents two very different GPUs serving different purposes. The AMD Radeon RX 5300M is a modern, efficient mobile graphics solution built on advanced 7 nm process technology. The NVIDIA GRID M60-1Q is an older, power-hungry server-oriented card from the Maxwell generation.

For users prioritizing energy efficiency and modern manufacturing, the AMD card is clearly superior. Its 85 W TDP versus 225 W TDP represents a 140 W difference, and it requires no power connectors while the NVIDIA card needs an 8-pin connector and a 550 W power supply. The AMD card also offers more memory capacity at 3 GB versus 1 GB, and faster memory technology with GDDR6 versus GDDR5.

For users prioritizing raw pixel throughput and texture processing, the NVIDIA card has the edge. Its 75.39 GPixel/s pixel rate is 63 percent higher than AMD's 46.24 GPixel/s, and its 150.8 GTexel/s texture rate is 18.5 percent higher. The NVIDIA card also has more shading units, TMUs, and ROPs, and a higher FP32 peak at 4.825 TFLOPS.

Benchmark data shows the AMD card in a higher percentile (80th versus 76th) with a higher raw score (36,529 versus 31,220). The AMD card's nearest rival comparison shows it performs within 1.7 percent of the AMD Radeon PRO W6400 and within 1.9 percent of the AMD Radeon Pro Duo, while the NVIDIA card's nearest rival comparison shows it within 1.4 percent of the NVIDIA TITAN RTX.

The release dates indicate the AMD card is four years newer, which explains its architectural advantages in process technology and memory. The NVIDIA card, released in 2015, represents an older design philosophy with higher power consumption and larger die size.

Ultimately, the choice depends on the use case. For mobile or power-constrained environments, the AMD Radeon RX 5300M is the data-supported recommendation due to its dramatically lower power draw, newer architecture, and better benchmark percentile. For scenarios requiring maximum pixel throughput and where power is not a constraint, the NVIDIA GRID M60-1Q offers higher theoretical peak rates, though its benchmark score is lower. Both cards are end-of-life, so availability and driver support should be considered.