AMD Radeon RX 5600M vs AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT Comparison

The AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT and AMD Radeon RX 5600M sit in the same performance percentile, both ranking at the 79th percentile against all GPUs. Their average benchmark scores are nearly identical—35,327 for the RX 6750 XT versus 35,264 for the RX 5600M—a gap of just 0.2%. Yet those aggregate numbers mask a dramatic split: in the three head-to-head tests available, the desktop RX 6750 XT wins every round, often by more than double. This is a tale of two very different GPUs that happen to land in the same statistical bucket.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most decisive victory for the RX 6750 XT comes in the Geekbench Vulkan test, where it scores 109,310 against the RX 5600M’s 48,843. That is a 123.8% advantage—more than double the mobile part’s output. The delta is stark enough to suggest architectural maturity rather than a simple clock-speed bump. In OpenCL, the RX 6750 XT posts 107,621 versus 55,628, a 93.5% lead. The pattern holds in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, with the desktop card scoring 2,548 against 1,320 for the RX 5600M, a 93% win.

What is striking is that despite these blowouts in individual tests, the average benchmark scores for the two cards are nearly level. The RX 5600M’s aggregate score of 35,264 is buoyed by data points not shared in the head-to-head set, while the RX 6750 XT’s 35,327 reflects a broader benchmark suite. In the nearestRivals data, the RX 6750 XT is 0.2% ahead of the RX 5600M, while the RX 5600M is 0.2% behind the RX 6750 XT—a statistical tie. Yet the head-to-head tests show the RX 6750 XT winning all three, with winsA at 3 and winsB at 0.

The Geekbench Vulkan result is particularly telling. A 123.8% delta in a cross-platform graphics API indicates the RX 6750 XT’s RDNA 2.0 architecture extracts far more performance per shader than the RDNA 1.0 design in the RX 5600M. The OpenCL gap of 93.5% reinforces this, showing that compute-heavy workloads favor the newer card overwhelmingly. In DX12, the 93% lead in Steel Nomad suggests that even when both cards run the same modern API, the desktop part’s raw throughput advantages shine through.

For the RX 5600M, there is no benchmark in this set where it takes the lead. Its best relative showing is in the aggregate average, where it trails by just 0.2%—but that is a function of different test distributions, not head-to-head parity. The data indicates that any workload covered by these three tests will favor the RX 6750 XT by a factor of roughly two.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT averages 35,327, which is 0.2% higher than the RX 5600M’s 35,264. Both cards occupy the 79th percentile of all GPUs.

Q: How does the RX 6750 XT perform in DirectX 12 compared to the RX 5600M?

A: In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, the RX 6750 XT scores 2,548 versus 1,320 for the RX 5600M, a 93% advantage for the desktop card.

Q: Is the RX 5600M competitive in any graphics API benchmark?

A: No. The RX 6750 XT wins all three head-to-head tests: Vulkan by 123.8%, OpenCL by 93.5%, and DX12 by 93%. The RX 5600M has zero wins in this comparison.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference between the two cards?

A: The RX 6750 XT has 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus with 432.0 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 5600M has 6 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Do both cards support the same DirectX version?

A: No. The RX 6750 XT supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the RX 5600M supports DirectX 12 (12_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: Which card has a higher boost clock?

A: The RX 6750 XT boosts to 2600 MHz, while the RX 5600M boosts to 1265 MHz. The RX 6750 XT also has a higher base clock at 2150 MHz versus 1035 MHz.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear conclusion: the AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT is the superior performer in every head-to-head test. Its 123.8% lead in Vulkan, 93.5% lead in OpenCL, and 93% lead in DX12 leave no ambiguity about which card delivers higher frame rates and compute throughput. The RX 5600M’s only saving grace is its aggregate average score, which is statistically indistinguishable from the RX 6750 XT—but that is a function of benchmark weighting, not real-world parity.

Buyers choosing between these two should favor the RX 6750 XT if their workloads rely on Vulkan, OpenCL, or DX12—which covers virtually all modern games and compute tasks. The desktop card’s 2,560 shading units, 160 TMUs, and 40 RT cores give it a structural advantage that the RX 5600M’s 2,304 shading units and 144 TMUs cannot offset, despite both having 64 ROPs.

The RX 5600M, however, is a mobile part designed for portability—it is an IGP with no power connectors and a 150 W TDP versus the RX 6750 XT’s 250 W. If the choice is between a laptop with an RX 5600M and a desktop with an RX 6750 XT, the desktop will crush it in raw performance. But the RX 5600M’s lower power draw and integrated form factor make it the only option for a thin-and-light gaming laptop. The data does not suggest any scenario where the RX 5600M wins on performance; it wins only on form factor and power efficiency.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every measurable specification. The RX 6750 XT uses the Navi 22 chip, while the RX 5600M uses Navi 10. The RX 6750 XT has 17,200 million transistors on a 335 mm² die, versus 10,300 million on 251 mm² for the RX 5600M. Transistor density is higher on the desktop part at 51.3M per mm² versus 41.0M per mm².

Clock speeds diverge sharply: the RX 6750 XT runs at 2150 MHz base and 2600 MHz boost, while the RX 5600M is at 1035 MHz base and 1265 MHz boost. Game clocks are 2495 MHz versus 1190 MHz. Memory clocks also differ, with the RX 6750 XT at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) and the RX 5600M at 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective).

Memory capacity is double on the RX 6750 XT: 12 GB versus 6 GB, both GDDR6 on 192-bit buses. Bandwidth follows suit: 432.0 GB/s versus 288.0 GB/s. The RX 6750 XT has 2,560 shading units, 160 TMUs, and 40 RT cores; the RX 5600M has 2,304 shading units, 144 TMUs, and no RT cores. Both have 64 ROPs.

Pixel rate is 166.4 GPixel/s for the RX 6750 XT against 80.96 GPixel/s for the RX 5600M. Texture rate is 416.0 GTexel/s versus 182.2 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 13.31 TFLOPS versus 5.829 TFLOPS; FP16 is 26.62 TFLOPS versus 11.66 TFLOPS, both at 2:1.

The RX 6750 XT is a dual-slot card with 1x 6-pin and 1x 8-pin power connectors and a 600 W suggested PSU. The RX 5600M is an IGP with no power connectors and no suggested PSU. The RX 6750 XT measures 267 mm by 110 mm by 40 mm; the RX 5600M has no listed dimensions. Display outputs differ as well: the RX 6750 XT has 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a, while the RX 5600M is portable-device dependent.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap is generational. The RX 6750 XT is built on RDNA 2.0, part of the Navi II (RX 6000) generation, while the RX 5600M uses RDNA 1.0 from the Navi Mobile (RX 5000M) generation. Both are fabricated on TSMC’s 7 nm process, but the RX 6750 XT packs 67% more transistors into a 33% larger die.

The most significant feature difference is ray tracing. The RX 6750 XT includes 40 dedicated RT cores; the RX 5600M has none. This makes the RX 6750 XT capable of hardware-accelerated ray tracing, while the RX 5600M must rely on compute-based methods or skip it entirely. The RX 6750 XT also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), which includes DXR and other next-gen features, whereas the RX 5600M is limited to DirectX 12 (12_1).

Both cards use the same PCIe 4.0 x16 bus interface and share the same 64 ROP count, but the RX 6750 XT’s RDNA 2.0 architecture delivers higher instruction efficiency per clock. The RX 6750 XT’s shading units operate at over twice the boost clock (2600 MHz versus 1265 MHz), which compounds with the higher unit count for a 2.28x FP32 throughput advantage. The RX 5600M’s RDNA 1.0 design lacks the ray tracing hardware and the refined memory compression of RDNA 2.0, which explains why its Vulkan performance trails by 123.8% despite having 90% of the shading units.

The RX 6750 XT was released on 2022-03-02, succeeding the Navi predecessor and preceding Navi III. The RX 5600M launched on 2020-07-06, succeeding Polaris Mobile with no successor listed. Both are end-of-life products, but the RX 6750 XT’s newer architecture and doubled memory capacity make it the more future-proof choice for modern APIs and higher-resolution textures.