AMD Radeon RX 5300M vs NVIDIA T1000 8 GB Comparison

The AMD Radeon RX 5300M and NVIDIA T1000 8 GB are both end-of-life mobile and workstation graphics solutions, but the data shows they are separated by more than just a generation. The Radeon RX 5300M is built on a 7 nm process with RDNA 1.0 architecture, offering a higher theoretical compute throughput, while the T1000 counters with double the memory capacity and a lower power envelope. Benchmark results place them in adjacent performance percentiles—80th for the AMD part and 79th for the NVIDIA—but their actual scores and architectural priorities tell a story of divergent use cases.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon RX 5300M takes the raw performance crown in the available benchmark data. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 36,529 places it in the 80th percentile of all GPUs, and it edges out the NVIDIA T1000 by a margin of 0.7%. This is a narrow victory, but it is consistent with the RX 5300M’s hardware specifications. The AMD part packs 1,408 shading units, 88 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs, running at a boost clock of 1445 MHz. This translates to 4.069 TFLOPS of FP32 compute and a texture rate of 127.2 GTexel/s, figures that are substantially higher than the T1000’s 2.500 TFLOPS and 78.12 GTexel/s. For workloads that are heavily parallel and shader-bound, the RX 5300M is the clear winner on paper and in the benchmark.

The NVIDIA T1000 8 GB wins where memory capacity and efficiency matter most. It offers 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, compared to the RX 5300M’s 3 GB on a 96-bit bus. While the AMD card has a slight bandwidth advantage at 168.0 GB/s versus 160.0 GB/s, the T1000’s 8 GB capacity is a decisive factor for professional workloads that need to hold larger datasets, textures, or render targets in VRAM. The T1000 also draws just 50 W of power, compared to 85 W for the RX 5300M, making it the better choice for compact or thermally constrained systems. Its single-slot form factor and 156 mm length further cement its position as a workstation-oriented card, whereas the RX 5300M is described as "Portable Device Dependent" for display outputs, indicating it is primarily a mobile part.

The Verdict

The data suggests two distinct buyers. If your priority is maximum compute throughput per watt and you are working within the constraints of a mobile chassis, the AMD Radeon RX 5300M is the performance pick. Its 0.7% lead over the T1000 in Geekbench OpenCL, combined with a 62.8% higher FP32 throughput (4.069 TFLOPS vs 2.500 TFLOPS), makes it the stronger choice for raw number crunching. The RX 5300M also outperforms the AMD Radeon Pro Duo by 1.9%, showing it can hold its own against older dual-GPU workstation flagships.

If your work requires 8 GB of VRAM, the NVIDIA T1000 is the only rational option. The RX 5300M’s 3 GB frame buffer will be a hard bottleneck for modern 3D rendering, large simulation meshes, or AI inference batches that exceed that limit. The T1000 also offers a significant efficiency advantage, drawing 41.2% less power (50 W vs 85 W) and requiring only a 250 W suggested PSU. Its Geekbench Vulkan score of 34,561 is 5.4% lower than the RX 5300M’s OpenCL result, but that gap is unlikely to matter if the workload fits within the T1000’s memory. For professionals needing a quiet, low-profile, single-slot card with 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, the T1000 is the clear choice. The RX 5300M, with its end-of-life status and 2019 release date, is better suited for gamers or mobile users who prioritize shader performance over memory capacity.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark list is empty, so the analysis relies on the individual benchmark scores and their nearest rival comparisons. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 5300M scores 36,529, which is 0.7% higher than the T1000’s 36,289 average score (derived from the nearestRivals delta). This translates to a 240-point difference—not a massive gap, but a consistent one. The RX 5300M’s nearest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN X, with an average score of 36,530 and a 0% delta, meaning the AMD card is effectively tied with that older flagship. It also sits 1.7% behind the AMD Radeon PRO W6400 (score 37,157), showing it is competitive within the current entry-level workstation segment.

The T1000’s nearest rival data is slightly different. Its Geekbench Vulkan score is 34,561, which is 0.1% ahead of the AMD Radeon HD 7970 and 0.6% behind the NVIDIA TITAN V. This puts the T1000 in a similar performance class to the RX 5300M, but the comparison is not apples-to-apples because the benchmark APIs differ (OpenCL vs Vulkan). The T1000 also trails the NVIDIA RTX A1000 by 1.0%, indicating it is at the bottom of NVIDIA’s modern workstation stack. Across both datasets, the RX 5300M shows a slight edge in raw compute, but the T1000’s larger memory pool and lower power draw are decisive factors for professional use.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute performance?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 5300M. It delivers 4.069 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 127.2 GTexel/s texture rate, compared to the NVIDIA T1000’s 2.500 TFLOPS and 78.12 GTexel/s. The RX 5300M also scores 36,529 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 0.7% higher than the T1000’s comparable score.

Q: How much memory does each card have, and does it matter?

A: The RX 5300M has 3 GB of GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus, while the T1000 has 8 GB on a 128-bit bus. The T1000’s 8 GB capacity is significantly more practical for modern professional workloads, even though the RX 5300M has slightly higher bandwidth (168.0 GB/s vs 160.0 GB/s).

Q: What are the power requirements?

A: The RX 5300M has a TDP of 85 W and uses no external power connectors. The T1000 has a TDP of 50 W, also with no power connectors, and a suggested PSU rating of 250 W. The T1000 is the more efficient option.

Q: Which card is better for a small form factor workstation?

A: The NVIDIA T1000. It is a single-slot card measuring 156 mm in length and 69 mm in height, with 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. The RX 5300M’s display outputs are "Portable Device Dependent," making it less suitable for a fixed desktop workstation.

Q: How do these cards compare to other GPUs in their respective benchmark pools?

A: The RX 5300M sits in the 80th percentile and is 1.9% faster than the AMD Radeon Pro Duo. The T1000 is in the 79th percentile and is 1.0% slower than the NVIDIA RTX A1000, but 0.6% faster than the NVIDIA TITAN V in its Vulkan test.

Q: Are these cards still in production?

A: No. Both are listed as end-of-life. The RX 5300M was released on November 12, 2019, and the T1000 on May 5, 2021.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon RX 5300M is built on the 7 nm process at TSMC, using the Navi 14 chip with RDNA 1.0 architecture. It packs 6,400 million transistors on a 158 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 40.5M per mm². The chip features 1,408 shading units, 88 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, with a base clock of 1000 MHz, a game clock of 1181 MHz, and a boost clock of 1445 MHz. Its memory subsystem uses 3 GB of GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus, with effective speeds of 14 Gbps and bandwidth of 168.0 GB/s. The card supports PCIe 4.0 x8 and APIs including DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Its predecessor is listed as Polaris Mobile, and it has no successor.

The NVIDIA T1000 8 GB uses the TU117 chip on a 12 nm process, also from TSMC, with Turing architecture. It contains 4,700 million transistors on a larger 200 mm² die, resulting in a lower density of 23.5M per mm². The GPU has 896 shading units, 56 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, with a base clock of 1065 MHz and a boost clock of 1395 MHz. Memory is 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, running at 10 Gbps effective and delivering 160.0 GB/s bandwidth. The T1000 uses PCIe 3.0 x16 and supports the same DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 APIs. It is a single-slot card with 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, and it succeeds the Quadro Volta line while being succeeded by Workstation Ampere.

The key architectural differences are clear: the RX 5300M uses a newer, denser 7 nm process and has 57.1% more shading units (1408 vs 896), leading to its higher compute throughput. The T1000, despite being on an older 12 nm node, offers a larger memory capacity and a lower TDP of 50 W, making it a more balanced choice for professional environments where power and space are at a premium. Neither card features ray tracing cores or tensor cores, so both rely on traditional rasterization and compute pipelines.