AMD Radeon RX 5600 OEM vs Intel Arc Pro A60 Comparison

The Intel Arc Pro A60 and AMD Radeon RX 5600 OEM represent two distinct approaches to graphics hardware, separated by three years of architectural evolution. The data reveals a clear, if modest, performance advantage for the Intel part, but the story is more nuanced than simple win/loss tallies. The Arc Pro A60 wins both head-to-head benchmark comparisons, yet the margins are surprisingly slim given the generational gap. The Geekbench OpenCL result shows the Intel card scoring 63,485 against the AMD’s 62,427, a 1.7% lead. The Vulkan gap widens to 6.4%, with the Arc Pro A60 posting 57,166 versus the RX 5600 OEM’s 53,743. These are not transformative differences; they suggest the newer architecture’s advantages are real but incremental in these specific workloads.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two available benchmark comparisons tell a consistent story: Intel wins, but not by a knockout. In Geekbench OpenCL, the Arc Pro A60’s 63,485 score edges out the RX 5600 OEM’s 62,427, a delta of just 1.7%. This is within the range of run-to-run variance for many workloads, but the consistency across both tests lends credibility to the result. The Vulkan test is more decisive, with the Arc Pro A60 scoring 57,166 against 53,743, a 6.4% advantage. This larger margin in Vulkan suggests the Intel architecture handles this modern API more efficiently, possibly due to its newer feature set and driver optimizations for this interface.

Context from the nearest rivals puts these scores in perspective. The Arc Pro A60’s average benchmark score is 60,326, placing it just 0.3% behind the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 (60,140) and essentially tied with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 at 60,347, which shows a 0% delta. Meanwhile, the RX 5600 OEM’s average of 58,085 sits 0.5% behind the AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT and 0.6% ahead of the Intel Arc A580. The percentile rankings reinforce this: the Arc Pro A60 sits in the 88th percentile of all GPUs, while the RX 5600 OEM is in the 87th. These are adjacent performance tiers, and the head-to-head data confirms they are close competitors overall, with the Intel card holding a consistent edge.

Architecture Differences

The underlying architectures explain why the Intel part pulls ahead despite both cards having identical shading unit counts. The Arc Pro A60 uses the DG2-256 chip built on TSMC’s 6 nm process, featuring 11,500 million transistors on a 269 mm² die. The RX 5600 OEM uses the Navi 10 chip on TSMC’s 7 nm node, with 10,300 million transistors on a 251 mm² die. Intel’s smaller process node allows for a transistor density of 42.8 million per square millimeter, compared to AMD’s 41.0 million. This density advantage translates to more headroom for features and clock speeds.

The Intel card’s Xe-HPG architecture includes 16 dedicated ray tracing cores, a feature entirely absent from the RDNA 1.0-based RX 5600 OEM. This is a fundamental capability difference that affects not just raw compute but also the types of workloads each card can accelerate. The Arc Pro A60 also boosts to 2050 MHz from a 900 MHz base, whereas the RX 5600 OEM boosts to 1560 MHz from a 1130 MHz base. Despite the lower base clock, Intel’s higher boost clock and newer architecture deliver superior peak performance, with the Arc Pro A60 achieving 8.397 TFLOPS FP32 against the AMD’s 6.390 TFLOPS. The Intel card’s memory runs at 16 Gbps effective, producing 384.0 GB/s of bandwidth over a 192-bit bus, while the AMD card’s 12 Gbps effective memory yields 288.0 GB/s on the same bus width. Both cards have 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, but the Intel’s higher clocks and faster memory give it a clear throughput advantage.

The Verdict

The data favors the Intel Arc Pro A60 for any user prioritizing raw benchmark performance. It wins both available tests, offers a higher average score, and includes ray tracing support that the AMD card lacks. The RX 5600 OEM’s only advantages are its lower 125 W TDP versus the Intel’s 130 W, and its dual-slot cooler versus the Intel’s single-slot design. For a professional or enthusiast building a compact system, the Intel card’s single-slot profile is a significant practical benefit. However, the AMD card’s older architecture and end-of-life status suggest it is a legacy option. The RX 5600 OEM’s predecessor is listed as Vega and its successor as Navi II, indicating it sits at the end of a product line. The Intel Arc Pro A60 remains active in production. From the data alone, the Intel card is the superior choice for performance, while the AMD card’s only claim is efficiency and a slightly lower power draw, which is marginal at best.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in several key specifications that explain their performance gap. The Arc Pro A60 uses a 6 nm process from TSMC, while the RX 5600 OEM uses a 7 nm process from the same foundry. Intel’s chip contains 11,500 million transistors versus AMD’s 10,300 million, and the die sizes are 269 mm² and 251 mm², respectively. The Intel card has a base clock of 900 MHz and a boost of 2050 MHz, while the AMD card runs at 1130 MHz base and 1560 MHz boost. Memory differs significantly: the Intel has 12 GB of GDDR6 at 16 Gbps effective, producing 384.0 GB/s, while the AMD has 6 GB at 12 Gbps effective, yielding 288.0 GB/s. The Intel card features 16 ray tracing cores, which the AMD card lacks entirely. Pixel and texture rates also favor Intel: 131.2 GPixel/s and 262.4 GTexel/s versus the AMD’s 99.84 GPixel/s and 199.7 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 8.397 TFLOPS for Intel and 6.390 TFLOPS for AMD. The Intel card is single-slot with no power connector specified, while the AMD is dual-slot with a 1x 8-pin connector. Both have the same 300 W suggested PSU, PCIe 4.0 x16 interface, and OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4 support, but the Intel card supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) while the AMD supports only DirectX 12 (12_1). Display outputs also differ: the Intel offers 4x DisplayPort 2.0, while the AMD offers 1x HDMI 2.0b and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a.

FAQ

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Arc Pro A60 has an average benchmark score of 60,326, compared to the AMD Radeon RX 5600 OEM’s 58,085, a difference of about 3.9%.

Q: How do the two cards compare in Vulkan performance?

A: In the Geekbench Vulkan test, the Intel Arc Pro A60 scores 57,166, which is 6.4% higher than the AMD Radeon RX 5600 OEM’s score of 53,743.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference?

A: The Intel Arc Pro A60 has 12 GB of GDDR6 memory, while the AMD Radeon RX 5600 OEM has 6 GB of GDDR6 memory. Both use a 192-bit bus, but the Intel card’s memory runs at 16 Gbps effective versus 12 Gbps effective on the AMD card.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon RX 5600 OEM support ray tracing?

A: No. The AMD card has no ray tracing cores listed, while the Intel Arc Pro A60 has 16 dedicated ray tracing cores.

Q: What are the DirectX version differences?

A: The Intel Arc Pro A60 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the AMD Radeon RX 5600 OEM supports DirectX 12 (12_1). This indicates the Intel card is compatible with newer rendering features.

Q: What is the production status of each card?

A: The Intel Arc Pro A60 is listed as “Active” in production, while the AMD Radeon RX 5600 OEM is listed as “End-of-life.”

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc Pro A60 wins the performance battle across every benchmark provided. Its 1.7% lead in OpenCL and 6.4% lead in Vulkan, combined with a higher average score and 88th percentile ranking, make it the clear choice for compute-heavy workloads like rendering or machine learning inference. The 16 ray tracing cores give it a capability the AMD card cannot match, making it suitable for ray-traced visualization tasks. The single-slot design and DisplayPort 2.0 outputs make it ideal for multi-GPU professional workstations where space is at a premium and modern display connectivity is required.

The AMD Radeon RX 5600 OEM’s wins are less about performance and more about operational characteristics. Its 125 W TDP is 5 W lower than the Intel’s 130 W, a negligible difference in most systems. The dual-slot cooler may offer better thermal headroom in some chassis, though the data does not specify this. Its HDMI 2.0b output could be an advantage for users with older monitors that lack DisplayPort. However, with an end-of-life status and no ray tracing support, its utility is limited to legacy applications or systems where the slightly lower power draw is critical. For any new build, the Intel Arc Pro A60 is the objectively superior choice based on the benchmark data, offering higher performance, more memory, and modern features for a modest increase in power consumption.