AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT vs NVIDIA P106-100 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data splits cleanly between these two cards, with the AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT taking every recorded head-to-head test. Out of the three shared benchmarks, the RX 5600 XT wins all three: 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, Geekbench OpenCL, and Geekbench Vulkan. The NVIDIA P106-100 does not win a single comparison in the database.

For compute-heavy workloads, the RX 5600 XT is the clear choice. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 68,537 more than doubles the P106-100’s 35,951, a 47.5% gap. That margin indicates substantially better raw compute throughput, which matters for rendering, physics simulation, and other general-purpose GPU tasks.

For graphics APIs, the RX 5600 XT again dominates. In Geekbench Vulkan, it scores 56,218 versus 32,897 for the P106-100, a 41.5% advantage. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test shows the largest relative gap: the RX 5600 XT posts 1,669 points against 899, a 46.1% deficit for the NVIDIA card. This suggests the AMD card is significantly stronger in modern DirectX 12 workloads.

The P106-100 does have one niche advantage: it is a mining-specific card with no display outputs. That means it cannot drive a monitor at all. The RX 5600 XT, by contrast, includes 1x HDMI 2.0b and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. For any use case requiring a visual output, the P106-100 is disqualified outright.

Overall, the data shows no scenario where the P106-100 outperforms the RX 5600 XT in benchmark scores. The AMD card leads in every measured category, and the only reason to consider the NVIDIA card would be its lower power draw, which we will examine in the architecture section.

Architecture Differences

These two GPUs come from different generations and design philosophies. The NVIDIA P106-100 uses the GP106 chip on the Pascal architecture, built on a 16 nm process at TSMC. The AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT uses the Navi 10 chip on the RDNA 1.0 architecture, also fabricated by TSMC but on a 7 nm process. That process node difference is significant: 7 nm versus 16 nm allows AMD to pack far more transistors into a similar die area.

The transistor counts tell the story. The P106-100 has 4,400 million transistors on a 200 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 22.0 million per square millimeter. The RX 5600 XT has 10,300 million transistors on a 251 mm² die, for a density of 41.0 million per square millimeter. The AMD chip nearly doubles the transistor density, which explains its higher compute capacity despite a modestly larger die.

Memory configurations are similar in capacity but different in technology. Both cards have 6 GB of VRAM and a 192-bit memory bus. The P106-100 uses GDDR5 with a memory clock of 2002 MHz (8 Gbps effective) and delivers 192.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The RX 5600 XT uses faster GDDR6 with a memory clock of 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective) and delivers 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth. That is a 49.8% bandwidth advantage for the AMD card, which directly impacts texture-heavy and high-resolution workloads.

The compute resources differ substantially. The P106-100 has 1,280 shading units, 80 texture mapping units, and 48 ROPs. The RX 5600 XT has 2,304 shading units, 144 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. These hardware counts translate to measured throughput: the RX 5600 XT achieves 99.84 GPixel/s pixel rate and 224.6 GTexel/s texture rate, versus 82.03 GPixel/s and 136.7 GTexel/s for the P106-100. The FP32 compute rating is 7.188 TFLOPS for AMD versus 4.375 TFLOPS for NVIDIA.

Power and connectivity also differ. The P106-100 has a 120 W TDP, a single 6-pin power connector, and a suggested 300 W PSU. The RX 5600 XT has a 150 W TDP, a single 8-pin connector, and a suggested 450 W PSU. The NVIDIA card is more power-efficient per watt, but the AMD card uses its extra power budget for performance. The P106-100 uses a PCIe 1.0 x16 interface, while the RX 5600 XT uses PCIe 4.0 x16, giving the AMD card a much newer bus standard. Both cards are dual-slot and end-of-life products.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The three head-to-head tests in the database all favor the AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT, but the margins vary by workload.

Starting with 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, the RX 5600 XT scores 1,669 against the P106-100’s 899. The delta is 46.1% in AMD’s favor. This is the largest percentage gap of the three tests and suggests that modern DirectX 12 rendering is a particular strength for the RDNA architecture. The P106-100, despite supporting DirectX 12 (12_1), falls well behind in this synthetic rendering scenario.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 5600 XT scores 68,537 versus 35,951. The delta is 47.5%, the biggest numeric gap in raw points. This test exercises general-purpose compute, and the AMD card’s higher shading unit count and FP32 throughput (7.188 TFLOPS versus 4.375 TFLOPS) show up clearly. The NVIDIA card’s FP16 performance is listed at 68.36 GFLOPS (1:64 ratio), which is extremely low and indicates poor half-precision compute. The RX 5600 XT, by contrast, has 14.38 TFLOPS FP16 with a 2:1 ratio, making it vastly more capable in workloads that use half-precision math.

The Geekbench Vulkan test shows the RX 5600 XT at 56,218 versus 32,897, a 41.5% advantage. Vulkan is a cross-platform graphics API, and both cards support version 1.4. The performance gap here is consistent with the other tests, confirming that the AMD card is simply faster across the board rather than winning only in specific API implementations.

It is notably the P106-100 has additional benchmark scores in the database beyond the head-to-head set. Its Geekbench Vulkan score of 32,897 and OpenCL score of 35,951 both appear in its individual record, and its 3DMark Steel Nomad score is 899. The RX 5600 XT also has extensive Passmark results: DirectX 9 at 202, DirectX 10 at 73, DirectX 11 at 96, DirectX 12 at 52, G2D at 870, G3D at 13,457, and GPU compute at 6,296. These additional metrics are not directly compared to the P106-100, but they provide context for the AMD card’s overall profile.

The average benchmark scores also favor AMD. The RX 5600 XT has an average benchmark score of 20,713, while the P106-100 has 23,249. However, this average is misleading because the P106-100 has only three benchmark results, all of which are relatively high compared to its actual gaming performance. The RX 5600 XT has eleven benchmark results, including several Passmark tests that score low and drag down the average. The percentile rankings are close: the P106-100 sits at the 68th percentile of all GPUs, while the RX 5600 XT sits at the 66th percentile.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT outperforms the NVIDIA P106-100 in every head-to-head benchmark recorded. The margins range from 41.5% to 47.5%, which is a substantial and consistent lead across DirectX 12, OpenCL, and Vulkan workloads.

For gaming and general graphics use, the RX 5600 XT is the only viable option of the two. The P106-100 has no display outputs, meaning it cannot be connected to a monitor. That alone eliminates it from any gaming, desktop, or content creation scenario that requires visual output. The RX 5600 XT provides 1x HDMI 2.0b and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a, making it a functional graphics card in addition to being faster.

For compute workloads that do not require display output, the RX 5600 XT still wins by a wide margin. Its OpenCL score is 90.6% higher than the P106-100’s, and its FP32 throughput is 64.3% higher. The only potential advantage of the P106-100 is its lower power draw: 120 W versus 150 W TDP, and a 300 W suggested PSU versus 450 W. If power efficiency is the sole priority and absolute performance is not, the NVIDIA card consumes less power. But the performance gap is so large that the efficiency argument is weak.

The nearest rivals for each card in the database provide additional context. The P106-100’s closest competitors include the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 (0% delta), the AMD Radeon RX 6600M (0.1% behind), the AMD Radeon R9 M290X (0.1% behind), and the AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700 (0.3% behind). The RX 5600 XT’s nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon R9 M390X (0.2% ahead), the Intel Arc A750 (0.6% ahead), the Intel Arc B570 (0.8% ahead), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile (0.9% ahead). Neither card sits at the top of its respective peer group, but the RX 5600 XT’s competition includes newer Intel Arc parts, suggesting it remains relevant against modern mid-range options.

The launch MSRP for the RX 5600 XT was 279 USD. The P106-100 has no recorded launch MSRP, reflecting its mining-specific positioning. Given the benchmark results, the RX 5600 XT is the clear pick for anyone needing actual graphics performance. The P106-100 is only relevant for power-conscious compute tasks with no display requirement.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in DirectX 12 workloads?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT. In the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, it scores 1,669 points versus 899 for the NVIDIA P106-100, a 46.1% advantage.

Q: Can the NVIDIA P106-100 be used for gaming?

A: No. The P106-100 has no display outputs, so it cannot connect to a monitor. The RX 5600 XT includes 1x HDMI 2.0b and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs.

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in compute performance?

A: The RX 5600 XT is significantly faster. Its Geekbench OpenCL score is 68,537 versus 35,951 for the P106-100, a 47.5% gap. The RX 5600 XT also has 7.188 TFLOPS FP32 versus 4.375 TFLOPS.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The RX 5600 XT has 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth using GDDR6, while the P106-100 has 192.2 GB/s using GDDR5. Both have 6 GB of VRAM on a 192-bit bus.

Q: Which card has a lower power requirement?

A: The NVIDIA P106-100 has a 120 W TDP and a suggested 300 W PSU, while the RX 5600 XT has a 150 W TDP and a suggested 450 W PSU. The P106-100 also uses a single 6-pin connector versus the RX 5600 XT’s single 8-pin.

Q: How do their transistor densities compare?

A: The RX 5600 XT has a density of 41.0 million transistors per square millimeter on a 7 nm process, while the P106-100 has 22.0 million per square millimeter on a 16 nm process. The AMD chip contains 10,300 million transistors versus 4,400 million for NVIDIA.