AMD Radeon RX 560 vs AMD Radeon Vega 3 Comparison

The AMD Radeon RX 560 and the AMD Radeon Vega 3 occupy vastly different tiers of the graphics hierarchy, and the benchmark data confirms a decisive, one-sided matchup. The RX 560, a dedicated Polaris 21 card, outperforms the Vega 3 IGP in every single overlapping test, with lead margins ranging from 288% to over 315%. The Vega 3, an integrated processor component, does not win any head-to-head benchmark, making this a comparison of raw capability versus power efficiency.

FAQ

Q: How big is the performance gap between the RX 560 and the Vega 3?

A: The domination is absolute. In the Geekbench Metal test, the RX 560 scores 18,941 versus the Vega 3's 4,880, a 288.1% advantage. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 560 scores 16,472 against 3,963, a 315.6% lead. The RX 560 wins 2 out of 2 head-to-head benchmarks.

Q: Which GPU has a better average benchmark score?

A: The RX 560 has an average benchmark score of 4,569, while the Vega 3 scores 4,268. This places the RX 560 in the 26th percentile of all GPUs, slightly above the Vega 3's 25th percentile.

Q: How does the RX 560 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The data shows it is tightly clustered with other mid-range parts. It is essentially tied with the AMD Radeon R5 M230 (0.2% behind) and Intel HD Graphics P530 (0.2% ahead). It trails the NVIDIA Quadro M3000M by 1.1% and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M by 1.3%.

Q: How does the Vega 3 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Vega 3 sits just below the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460M, which is 0.3% faster, and the AMD FirePro W2100, which is 0.6% faster. It is 0.6% ahead of the NVIDIA Quadro K3000M and 1.5% behind the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 GDDR6.

Q: What are the fundamental differences in memory architecture?

A: The RX 560 is a discrete card with 4 GB of dedicated GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 112.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Vega 3 is an IGP that relies on System Shared memory, with its bus width and bandwidth listed as "System Shared" and "System Dependent," respectively.

Q: Which GPU supports more advanced DirectX features?

A: The Vega 3 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), which is a higher feature level than the RX 560's DirectX 12 (12_0). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.3.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the AMD Radeon RX 560 is the performance pick. It offers over triple the compute performance in OpenCL and nearly quadruple the performance in Metal. Users who need to run graphically intensive applications or games with playable frame rates should choose the RX 560. Its 75 W TDP and 1024 shading units provide a level of rasterization and compute power that the Vega 3 cannot approach. The RX 560 also has a dedicated 4 GB GDDR5 frame buffer, which prevents the system RAM bottlenecks that typically plague integrated graphics.

The AMD Radeon Vega 3, conversely, is a power-sipping solution. With a 15 W TDP and an IGP form factor, it is designed for basic desktop tasks and light media consumption. Its performance, while minimal, is sufficient for 2D workloads and older or less demanding 3D titles. The benchmark data shows it does not win a single head-to-head test against the RX 560, but its value lies in its integration and power profile, not in raw throughput. For a system without a dedicated graphics card, the Vega 3 is a functional baseline; for anyone comparing it to a discrete RX 560, the choice is clear.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results paint a picture of a generational and architectural chasm. The most significant win for the RX 560 comes in the Geekbench OpenCL test, where it scores 16,472 against the Vega 3's 3,963. This 315.6% delta is the largest margin recorded in the comparison and highlights the RX 560's superior raw compute capabilities, which stem from its 2.611 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput versus the Vega 3's 422.4 GFLOPS.

The Geekbench Metal test shows a similar story, though with a slightly smaller, yet still massive, gap. The RX 560 scores 18,941, dwarfing the Vega 3's 4,880. This 288.1% advantage demonstrates that the RX 560's advantage extends beyond raw compute into graphics API performance. The RX 560's pixel rate of 20.40 GPixel/s and texture rate of 81.60 GTexel/s are roughly 4.6x and 6.2x higher than the Vega 3's respective 4.400 GPixel/s and 13.20 GTexel/s, which explains the metric dominance.

The Vega 3's best performance comes in the Geekbench Vulkan test, where it scores 3,961. However, this result has no direct comparison in the head-to-head data, and it does not translate into a win against the RX 560 in any shared test. The RX 560 also holds a significant lead in the Passmark suite, though these scores (G3D: 3,671, G2D: 485) are not directly compared in the head-to-head section. The data consistently favors the discrete card.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs diverge on almost every fundamental specification. The RX 560 is built on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries, with a die size of 123 mm² containing 3,000 million transistors. The Vega 3, by contrast, uses a 12 nm process, also at GlobalFoundries, but is part of a much larger 210 mm² die housing 4,940 million transistors, as it is an integrated processor component.

Clock speeds differ dramatically. The RX 560 has a base clock of 1175 MHz and a boost clock of 1275 MHz, while the Vega 3 has a low base clock of 300 MHz but a boost clock of 1100 MHz. Memory configurations are entirely distinct: the RX 560 uses 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 112.0 GB/s bandwidth, whereas the Vega 3 uses System Shared memory with a System Dependent bandwidth.

Shader resources are heavily skewed toward the RX 560. It features 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, compared to the Vega 3's 192 shading units, 12 TMUs, and 4 ROPs. The RX 560 also has a 75 W TDP and requires a 250 W suggested PSU, while the Vega 3 sips only 15 W and has no power connectors or PSU recommendation. The RX 560 is a dual-slot card that is 170 mm long, whereas the Vega 3 is an IGP with no physical dimensions. Finally, the RX 560 carries a launch MSRP of 99 USD.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gulf between these two GPUs is as wide as the performance gap. The RX 560 is based on the Polaris 21 chip, which uses the GCN 4.0 architecture, and belongs to the Polaris (RX 500) generation. Its predecessor is Arctic Islands, and its successor is Vega. It supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3.

The Vega 3, on the other hand, is based on the Picasso chip, which uses the newer GCN 5.0 architecture, and belongs to the Vega IGP (Picasso) generation. Its predecessor is GCN 3.0 IGP, and its successor is Vega II IGP. It supports a higher DirectX feature level, DirectX 12 (12_1), along with the same OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.3.

A key architectural difference lies in FP16 compute. The Vega 3 offers 844.8 GFLOPS of FP16 performance, which is a 2:1 ratio compared to its FP32 rate of 422.4 GFLOPS. The RX 560, conversely, offers a 1:1 ratio, with both FP16 and FP32 at 2.611 TFLOPS. This suggests the Vega 3 has some specialized FP16 throughput, but the RX 560's absolute numbers are so much higher that it remains superior in practice. The RX 560 also uses a PCIe 3.0 x8 interface, while the Vega 3 is connected via an IGP bus.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon RX 560 wins decisively in all scenarios requiring 3D graphics performance. Its 2.611 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, combined with 16 ROPs and 64 TMUs, makes it the clear choice for gaming, 3D rendering, and GPU-accelerated compute tasks. The Geekbench OpenCL score of 16,472 versus 3,963 indicates that any workload leveraging OpenCL will be over 3x faster on the RX 560. Its dedicated 4 GB GDDR5 memory with 112.0 GB/s bandwidth ensures that textures and frame buffers are handled without competing with system resources, making it suitable for modern game titles at 1080p with medium settings.

The AMD Radeon Vega 3 wins in power efficiency and platform integration. With a 15 W TDP, it is designed for ultra-portable or low-power systems where a discrete GPU is not feasible. It has no physical footprint, is powered by the motherboard, and requires no external power connectors. This makes it the only choice for systems that cannot accommodate a dual-slot, 170 mm card. Its performance is adequate for basic desktop use, video playback, and very light or older games, but the benchmark data shows it is not a gaming part. The Vega 3's higher DirectX feature level (12_1) is a minor technical advantage, but it does not translate into any performance win in the measured tests. For any user whose priority is frame rates, the RX 560 is the definitive choice.