AMD Radeon RX 5600 OEM vs NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal Comparison

The database places the NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal and the AMD Radeon RX 5600 OEM in different performance tiers, but the recorded results show a clear hierarchy: the TITAN X Pascal leads the head-to-head on both benchmark tests, winning the Geekbench OpenCL comparison by 6.8% and the Geekbench Vulkan comparison by a commanding 44.2%. The Radeon RX 5600 OEM counters with far lower power draw, a newer process node, and a newer bus interface, which makes this a contest between raw compute throughput and efficiency-driven modernity rather than a close fight on scores.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster overall according to the recorded data?

A: The NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal. It has an average benchmark score of 72098 versus 58085 for the RX 5600 OEM, and it wins both head-to-head tests, including a 44.2% advantage in Geekbench Vulkan.

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

A: The TITAN X Pascal scored 66696 against 62427 for the RX 5600 OEM, a 6.8% win for the NVIDIA card. This is the closest result between the two in the database.

Q: How power-hungry are these cards?

A: The TITAN X Pascal is rated at 250 W TDP with 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin power connectors and a suggested PSU of 600 W. The RX 5600 OEM sits at 125 W TDP with a single 8-pin connector and a suggested PSU of 300 W, exactly half the board power of the TITAN.

Q: How much memory does each card have, and of what type?

A: The TITAN X Pascal carries 12 GB of GDDR5X on a 384-bit bus for 480.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The RX 5600 OEM has 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus for 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: Where does each card sit relative to all GPUs in the database?

A: The TITAN X Pascal ranks in the 91st percentile; the RX 5600 OEM ranks in the 87th percentile. Both are upper-tier entries, but the TITAN holds the higher position.

Q: Are either of these cards still in production?

A: No. Both are listed as end-of-life. The TITAN X Pascal was released in August 2016, and the RX 5600 OEM in January 2020.

Architecture Differences

These cards come from different design eras and it shows in nearly every structural metric. The TITAN X Pascal is built on the GP102 chip, Pascal architecture, and TSMC's 16 nm process, with 11,800 million transistors packed into a 471 mm² die for a density of 25.1M per mm². The RX 5600 OEM uses the Navi 10 chip, RDNA 1.0 architecture, and TSMC's 7 nm node, fitting 10,300 million transistors into just 251 mm², which yields a density of 41.0M per mm². The Navi part achieves substantially higher density on less than half the die area, a direct consequence of moving to the newer node.

The resource allocation is lopsided in the TITAN's favor. It fields 3584 shading units, 224 TMUs, and 96 ROPs, compared to 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs on the RX 5600 OEM. That hardware gap translates into theoretical rates: the TITAN delivers 10.97 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, 147.0 GPixel/s of pixel fill, and 342.9 GTexel/s of texture fill, against 6.390 TFLOPS, 99.84 GPixel/s, and 199.7 GTexel/s for the Radeon.

Precision behavior differs sharply. The TITAN X Pascal rates at only 171.5 GFLOPS of FP16 (a 1:64 ratio relative to FP32), a legacy of Pascal's positioning. The RX 5600 OEM delivers 12.78 TFLOPS of FP16 at a 2:1 ratio, meaning RDNA handles half-precision workloads at full muscle where Pascal throttles them drastically. For any workload leaning on FP16, that is an enormous architectural advantage for the AMD card despite its lower FP32 ceiling.

The I/O and platform story also favors the newer card. The RX 5600 OEM uses a PCIe 4.0 x16 bus interface; the TITAN is limited to PCIe 3.0 x16. Clocking strategies differ: the TITAN runs a 1417 MHz base and 1531 MHz boost, while the Navi part runs 1130 MHz base, 1375 MHz game clock, and 1560 MHz boost. Neither card has RT cores or tensor cores. Both support DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API support is a wash.

The Verdict

For compute performance, the verdict is unambiguous: the TITAN X Pascal is the stronger card in the recorded data. It wins both benchmark tests, holds an average score of 72098 versus 58085, sits four percentile points higher at the 91st versus the 87th percentile, and pairs that with double the memory capacity and substantially more memory bandwidth. Its 12 GB frame buffer and 480.4 GB/s of bandwidth make it the pick for memory-heavy workloads.

The RX 5600 OEM earns its place through efficiency and precision throughput. Half the TDP at 125 W, a single 8-pin connector, a 300 W suggested PSU, and 12.78 TFLOPS of FP16 make it the choice where power envelope or half-precision throughput dominates the decision. Its PCIe 4.0 interface and 7 nm construction also make it the more modern platform fit. Both cards are end-of-life, so this comparison is about legacy positioning rather than current availability.

Specification Differences

• Architecture: Pascal (GeForce 10) versus RDNA 1.0 (RX 5000 series)
• Chip and node: GP102 on 16 nm versus Navi 10 on 7 nm, both fabricated by TSMC
• Die size and transistors: 471 mm² with 11,800 million transistors versus 251 mm² with 10,300 million; density of 25.1M per mm² versus 41.0M per mm²
• Shading units, TMUs, ROPs: 3584 / 224 / 96 versus 2048 / 128 / 64
• FP32: 10.97 TFLOPS versus 6.390 TFLOPS
• FP16: 171.5 GFLOPS at 1:64 versus 12.78 TFLOPS at 2:1
• Clocks: 1417 MHz base and 1531 MHz boost versus 1130 MHz base, 1375 MHz game, and 1560 MHz boost
• Memory: 12 GB GDDR5X on a 384-bit bus at 480.4 GB/s versus 6 GB GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus at 288.0 GB/s
• Memory speed: 1251 MHz (10 Gbps effective) versus 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective)
• TDP and power: 250 W, 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin, 600 W suggested PSU versus 125 W, 1x 8-pin, 300 W suggested PSU
• Bus interface: PCIe 3.0 x16 versus PCIe 4.0 x16
• Display outputs: 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a versus 1x HDMI 2.0b, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a
• Launch MSRP: 1,199 USD for the TITAN X Pascal; no launch MSRP recorded for the RX 5600 OEM
• Release date: August 2016 versus January 2020

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

Only two tests appear in the head-to-head set, and the TITAN X Pascal takes both, for a final tally of two wins to zero.

The Geekbench OpenCL result is the competitive one. The TITAN scored 66696 and the RX 5600 OEM scored 62427, a delta of 6.8%. That is a meaningful but not overwhelming gap, and it aligns with the smaller difference between the cards' FP32 throughput figures. In OpenCL-class general compute, the Radeon remains within striking distance of the larger Pascal board.

Geekbench Vulkan is where the gap collapses into a rout. The TITAN posted 77499 while the RX 5600 OEM managed 53743, a 44.2% advantage for the NVIDIA card. Interestingly, this is the TITAN's stronger test relative to its own OpenCL score, while the reverse is true for the Radeon, whose Vulkan score falls well below its OpenCL result. Whatever the driver or API-level cause, the database shows the TITAN's Vulkan path scaling far better than the Navi part's in this workload set.

Context from the broader database reinforces the tier separation. The TITAN's average of 72098 places it essentially alongside the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 (72379 average, within 0.4%), the AMD Radeon RX 6650M (71768, within 0.5%), the AMD Radeon RX 6600 LE (70829, within 1.8%), and the AMD Radeon Vega Frontier Edition (73370, within 1.7%). The RX 5600 OEM's average of 58085 places it beside the Intel Arc A570M (58239), the AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT entry at 58392, the Intel Arc A580 (57756), and the NVIDIA P102-100 (58528), all within a fraction of a percent. The two cards simply do not occupy the same competitive neighborhood.

Where Each One Wins

The TITAN X Pascal wins on:

• Sheer compute scale: 10.97 TFLOPS FP32 versus 6.390 TFLOPS, backed by 3584 shading units versus 2048
• Memory capacity and bandwidth: 12 GB versus 6 GB, and 480.4 GB/s versus 288.0 GB/s, decisive for large working sets
• Both recorded benchmark tests, including the 44.2% Vulkan victory
• Rasterization throughput: 147.0 GPixel/s and 342.9 GTexel/s versus 99.84 GPixel/s and 199.7 GTexel/s
• Higher database standing: 91st percentile versus 87th

The RX 5600 OEM wins on:

• Efficiency: 125 W TDP versus 250 W, and a 300 W suggested PSU versus 600 W, half the platform power demand
• FP16 throughput: 12.78 TFLOPS at 2:1 versus 171.5 GFLOPS at 1:64, an overwhelming lead in half-precision workloads
• Modern platform features: PCIe 4.0 x16 versus PCIe 3.0 x16, plus GDDR6 memory running at 12 Gbps effective versus 10 Gbps effective GDDR5X
• Density and design efficiency: 41.0M transistors per mm² on 7 nm versus 25.1M per mm² on 16 nm, achieved on a 251 mm² die versus 471 mm²

In short, the recorded data points to the TITAN X Pascal for maximum compute and memory headroom, and to the RX 5600 OEM for power-constrained or FP16-leaning deployments that can live with 6 GB of memory.