AMD Radeon RX 5600 OEM vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Mobile Comparison

The AMD Radeon RX 5600 OEM and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Mobile occupy very different positions in the GPU landscape, one being a desktop part from the RDNA 1.0 era and the other a flagship laptop solution built on Ada Lovelace. The recorded benchmark data shows a clear performance hierarchy, but the architectural gap between the two is equally instructive, revealing how far mobile graphics have come in just a few years. This analysis draws exclusively on the database entries for both cards, interpreting the scores, specifications, and relative standings without external assumptions.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score in the database?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 5600 OEM records an average benchmark score of 58085, while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 Mobile averages 43667. This places the AMD card in the 87th percentile of all GPUs, compared to the NVIDIA card’s 84th percentile.

Q: How do the two cards compare in the Geekbench OpenCL test?

A: The RTX 4090 Mobile scores 180831 in OpenCL, which is 65.5% higher than the RX 5600 OEM’s 62427. This represents the larger of the two head-to-head deltas recorded.

Q: What is the difference in the Vulkan benchmark results?

A: In Geekbench Vulkan, the RTX 4090 Mobile scores 170774 against the RX 5600 OEM’s 53743, a delta of 68.5% in favor of the NVIDIA part. The AMD card’s Vulkan score is lower than its OpenCL score, while the NVIDIA card’s Vulkan result is slightly lower than its OpenCL result.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The RTX 4090 Mobile features 9728 shading units, while the RX 5600 OEM has 2048. This is a 4.75x difference in raw shader count.

Q: Are both cards based on the same manufacturing process?

A: No. The RX 5600 OEM uses a 7 nm process, while the RTX 4090 Mobile uses a 5 nm process. Both are fabricated by TSMC, but the transistor density differs substantially: 41.0M per mm² for the AMD chip versus 121.1M per mm² for the NVIDIA chip.

Q: Which GPU has the higher boost clock?

A: The RTX 4090 Mobile boosts to 1695 MHz, compared to the RX 5600 OEM’s boost of 1560 MHz. The NVIDIA card also has a higher base clock at 1335 MHz versus 1130 MHz.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs represent distinct architectural generations. The RX 5600 OEM is built on RDNA 1.0, using the Navi 10 chip, and belongs to the Radeon RX 5000 series, which succeeded Vega and preceded Navi II. In contrast, the RTX 4090 Mobile uses the AD103 chip with Ada Lovelace architecture, part of the GeForce 40 Mobile generation that followed GeForce 30 Mobile and precedes GeForce 50 Mobile.

The manufacturing process is a key differentiator. TSMC fabricates both, but the RX 5600 OEM uses a 7 nm node with 10,300 million transistors on a 251 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 41.0M per mm². The RTX 4090 Mobile employs a 5 nm node with 45,900 million transistors on a 379 mm² die, achieving 121.1M per mm². This density advantage translates into far more compute resources in a similar physical footprint.

Compute resources differ dramatically. The RX 5600 OEM has 2048 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 64 ROPs. The RTX 4090 Mobile has 9728 shading units, 304 TMUs, and 112 ROPs. Additionally, the NVIDIA part includes 76 RT cores and 304 tensor cores, hardware that the AMD card lacks entirely. The RX 5600 OEM has no dedicated ray tracing or tensor acceleration blocks.

Memory architecture also diverges. Both use GDDR6, but the RX 5600 OEM has 6 GB on a 192-bit bus, delivering 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The RTX 4090 Mobile has 16 GB on a 256-bit bus, delivering 576.0 GB/s. The memory clock differs as well: the AMD card runs at 1500 MHz with 12 Gbps effective, while the NVIDIA card runs at 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective.

Feature support shows a generational gap. The RX 5600 OEM supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while the RTX 4090 Mobile supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4. The RTX 4090 Mobile’s API level includes the full ray tracing pipeline, which is not present in the older AMD architecture.

Physical and power characteristics also differ. The RX 5600 OEM is a dual-slot desktop card with a 1x 8-pin power connector and a 125 W TDP, requiring a 300 W suggested PSU. The RTX 4090 Mobile is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with no power connectors and a 120 W TDP. The NVIDIA part is designed for portable devices, with display outputs listed as portable device dependent, whereas the AMD card offers 1x HDMI 2.0b and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records two head-to-head comparisons, both favoring the RTX 4090 Mobile. In Geekbench OpenCL, the NVIDIA card scores 180831 against the AMD card’s 62427, a delta of 65.5% in NVIDIA’s favor. This is a substantial gap, reflecting the difference in shading units and memory bandwidth. The RX 5600 OEM’s score places it in the same performance class as its nearest rivals, which include the Intel Arc A570M with an average score of 58239 and a delta of 0.3% relative to the AMD card’s 58085 average. The RX 5600 OEM also sits close to the AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT (average 58392, delta 0.5% lower) and the Intel Arc A580 (average 57756, delta 0.6% higher). This indicates that the RX 5600 OEM, despite its age, competes with midrange parts from other vendors, but it is nowhere near the RTX 4090 Mobile’s performance tier.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the RTX 4090 Mobile scores 170774, while the RX 5600 OEM scores 53743, a delta of 68.5%. This is the larger margin of the two tests. The Vulkan result for the AMD card is lower than its OpenCL result, suggesting that the RDNA 1.0 architecture does not extract as much performance from the Vulkan API as the newer Ada Lovelace design does. The RTX 4090 Mobile’s Vulkan score is also lower than its OpenCL score, but the relative drop is smaller, and the absolute numbers remain far higher.

The wins tally is 0 for the RX 5600 OEM and 2 for the RTX 4090 Mobile. No benchmark in the recorded data shows the AMD card ahead. The deltas are consistent across both tests, indicating that the performance gap is not workload-specific but rather a general compute advantage for the NVIDIA part. The RTX 4090 Mobile’s nearest rivals in the database include the NVIDIA Quadro M6000 (average 43301, delta 0.8% lower) and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 Mobile (average 43268, delta 0.9% lower), as well as the NVIDIA RTX A6000 (average 44075, delta 0.9% higher). This places the RTX 4090 Mobile’s average score of 43667 in a narrow band around professional and recent mobile GPUs, but its individual benchmark scores in OpenCL and Vulkan are far above that average, suggesting strong performance in compute-oriented tests.

The RX 5600 OEM’s average score of 58085 is higher than the RTX 4090 Mobile’s average of 43667, but this is misleading when looking at the head-to-head tests. The average includes different benchmark sets, and the RTX 4090 Mobile has additional PassMark results that drag its average down. The OpenCL and Vulkan scores, which are directly comparable, show a clear NVIDIA advantage. The RX 5600 OEM’s percentile rank of 87 versus the RTX 4090 Mobile’s 84 also reflects the average score distribution, not the specific tests where the two were measured head-to-head.

The Verdict

From the recorded data, the RTX 4090 Mobile is the superior performer in the two directly comparable benchmarks. Its OpenCL and Vulkan scores are roughly three times higher than the RX 5600 OEM’s, with deltas of 65.5% and 68.5% respectively. The NVIDIA part also has a massive resource advantage: 9728 shading units versus 2048, 304 TMUs versus 128, 112 ROPs versus 64, and double the memory bandwidth at 576.0 GB/s versus 288.0 GB/s. The RTX 4090 Mobile’s 16 GB VRAM is more than double the RX 5600 OEM’s 6 GB, and its 5 nm process with 121.1M transistors per mm² indicates a much denser and more efficient design.

The RX 5600 OEM does have a higher average benchmark score (58085 versus 43667) and a higher percentile rank (87 versus 84), but this is due to the different benchmark suites included in the database. The head-to-head tests, which are the only direct comparisons, show no scenario where the AMD card wins. The RX 5600 OEM’s nearest rivals, such as the Intel Arc A570M and the AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT, all have average scores within 0.8% of its own, indicating that it is a solid midrange desktop GPU. However, against the RTX 4090 Mobile, it is outclassed in every measured compute dimension.

For users seeking maximum compute performance in a mobile form factor, the RTX 4090 Mobile is the clear choice based on the data. It offers higher clocks, more memory, and dedicated RT and tensor cores, all within a 120 W TDP that is lower than the RX 5600 OEM’s 125 W TDP. The RX 5600 OEM, being end-of-life and designed for desktop systems, cannot match the NVIDIA part’s raw throughput. The verdict is straightforward: the RTX 4090 Mobile dominates the head-to-head benchmarks, while the RX 5600 OEM remains competitive only within its own historical segment.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every specification field. The process node is 7 nm for AMD versus 5 nm for NVIDIA. Transistor count is 10,300 million versus 45,900 million. Die size is 251 mm² versus 379 mm². Transistor density is 41.0M per mm² versus 121.1M per mm².

Clock speeds differ: base 1130 MHz versus 1335 MHz, boost 1560 MHz versus 1695 MHz. The AMD card has a game clock of 1375 MHz, while the NVIDIA card has no game clock listed. Memory clocks are 1500 MHz with 12 Gbps effective versus 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective.

Memory specifications: 6 GB versus 16 GB, both GDDR6, but bus width is 192 bit versus 256 bit, and bandwidth is 288.0 GB/s versus 576.0 GB/s.

Compute units: shading units 2048 versus 9728, TMUs 128 versus 304, ROPs 64 versus 112. The RTX 4090 Mobile has 76 RT cores and 304 tensor cores; the RX 5600 OEM has none.

Pixel rate is 99.84 GPixel/s versus 189.8 GPixel/s. Texture rate is 199.7 GTexel/s versus 515.3 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 6.390 TFLOPS versus 32.98 TFLOPS. FP16 is 12.78 TFLOPS (2:1) versus 32.98 TFLOPS (1:1).

TDP is 125 W versus 120 W. Slot width is dual-slot versus IGP. Power connectors are 1x 8-pin versus none. Suggested PSU is 300 W versus not listed. Bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x16 for both.

Display outputs: 1x HDMI 2.0b and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a versus portable device dependent. DirectX support is 12 (12_1) versus 12 Ultimate (12_2). OpenGL and Vulkan versions are the same at 4.6 and 1.4.

Production status is end-of-life for AMD versus active for NVIDIA. Release dates are 2020-01-20 versus 2023-01-02. Predecessors are Vega versus GeForce 30 Mobile, and successors are Navi II versus GeForce 50 Mobile. No launch MSRP is listed for either card.