GPU Comparison

AMD Radeon RX 5600M and NVIDIA RTX A6000 occupy opposite ends of the GPU spectrum, with the former built for mobile gaming and the latter designed as a workstation behemoth. The benchmark data shows a decisive performance gap, yet each card serves a distinct purpose based on its architectural heritage and physical design constraints. The RX 5600M, an end-of-life mobile part from the Radeon RX 5000 series, delivers a modest average benchmark score of 46,601, while the RTX A6000, also end-of-life but from the workstation Ampere line, posts a lower average of 44,075 despite having far more raw hardware resources. This apparent contradiction stems from differing benchmark workloads and the fact that the RX 5600M’s percentile ranking (85th) slightly edges out the RTX A6000’s (84th), indicating that the mobile card performs admirably within its intended segment. The head-to-head results, however, tell a clearer story: in the two shared tests, the RTX A6000 wins both by overwhelming margins, with a 69.3% lead in Geekbench OpenCL and a 70.3% lead in Geekbench Vulkan. These numbers frame the analysis that follows, where architectural differences, memory configurations, and raw compute throughput define the separation between these two very different products.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The direct comparison between these two GPUs is limited to two benchmark tests, but the results are unambiguous. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RTX A6000 scores 193,937 against the RX 5600M’s 59,589, a delta of -69.3% for the AMD part. This means the NVIDIA card delivers roughly 3.25 times the compute performance in this API, reflecting its massive advantage in shading units (10,752 versus 2,304) and FP32 throughput (38.71 TFLOPS versus 5.829 TFLOPS). The gap is even wider in Geekbench Vulkan, where the RTX A6000 hits 164,462 versus 48,843, a delta of -70.3%. Here, the NVIDIA card’s advantage narrows slightly in absolute terms but remains dominant, with the RX 5600M achieving less than a third of the score.

These deltas are not marginal; they represent a generational and class-based chasm. The RTX A6000’s nearest rivals in the database include the GeForce RTX 4090 Mobile (delta 0.9%) and GeForce RTX 4070 Ti (delta -1.6%), while the RX 5600M’s closest competitors are the Intel Arc A530M (delta 0%) and AMD Radeon RX 6550M (delta -0.2%). Notably, the RX 5600M’s average score of 46,601 is actually higher than the RTX A6000’s 44,075, which suggests that the database’s average includes a broader set of workloads where the mobile card’s efficiency and driver optimizations for gaming-oriented tests compensate for its lower raw power. However, when isolated to the two common compute-heavy benchmarks, the RTX A6000’s superiority is absolute, and no amount of contextualization can close that gap. The data shows zero wins for the RX 5600M in head-to-head tests, while the RTX A6000 claims both, cementing its position as the undisputed performance leader in these specific workloads.

Where Each One Wins

Based strictly on benchmark results, the RTX A6000 wins every shared test, but the RX 5600M still holds advantages in specific contexts that are not captured by those two metrics. The RX 5600M’s average benchmark score of 46,601, which is 5.7% higher than the RTX A6000’s 44,075, indicates that across the full suite of tests used to compute that average, which includes the Geekbench Metal score of 76,653 for the AMD card, the mobile GPU performs proportionally better in certain API environments. The Geekbench Metal score of 76,653 is noteworthy because the RTX A6000 has no corresponding Metal benchmark in the data, suggesting that the RX 5600M leverages Apple’s Metal API more effectively, likely due to its RDNA 1.0 architecture’s optimization for cross-platform compute.

For the RTX A6000, the wins are concentrated in OpenCL and Vulkan, where its 38.71 TFLOPS FP32 and 38.71 TFLOPS FP16 (1:1) throughput overwhelm the RX 5600M’s 5.829 TFLOPS FP32 and 11.66 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1). The NVIDIA card also excels in legacy DirectX tests, with PassMark scores of 245 in DirectX 9, 191 in DirectX 11, and 155 in DirectX 10, while the RX 5600M has no DirectX benchmark data available. This suggests the RTX A6000 is better suited for applications that rely on older graphics APIs, a common requirement in professional visualization and CAD software. The RX 5600M, by contrast, has no PassMark scores in the pack, so its strengths are limited to the three Geekbench tests where it appears, with its highest score being the Metal result. In practical terms, the RX 5600M wins in scenarios where power efficiency and portability matter, its 150 W TDP versus 300 W, and IGP slot width versus dual-slot, but the data does not quantify those advantages beyond the specification sheet.

The Verdict

The choice between these two GPUs hinges entirely on workload and physical constraints, not on benchmark superiority. If the task involves OpenCL or Vulkan compute, the RTX A6000 is the only rational pick, as it outperforms the RX 5600M by more than 69% in both categories, and its 48 GB of GDDR6 memory with 768.0 GB/s bandwidth dwarfs the RX 5600M’s 6 GB at 288.0 GB/s. The RTX A6000’s 84 ray tracing cores and 336 tensor cores, absent entirely from the RX 5600M, make it indispensable for any ray-traced or AI-accelerated workload, though the benchmark pack does not include specific tests for those features. The RTX A6000’s launch MSRP is 4,649 USD, a figure that reflects its workstation positioning, but the data shows it delivers performance commensurate with that tier.

Conversely, the RX 5600M is the pick for mobile systems where the RTX A6000’s 267 mm length, 112 mm height, and 300 W TDP are physically impossible to accommodate. Its IGP slot width and lack of power connectors mean it is soldered to a motherboard, making it a component for laptops rather than an upgradeable desktop card. The RX 5600M’s higher percentile rank (85th versus 84th) and higher average score (46,601 versus 44,075) suggest that in the aggregate of all GPU benchmarks, it punches above its weight class, making it a capable choice for gaming laptops that also need some compute ability. However, the data is clear: for any task that both cards can perform, the RTX A6000 wins decisively. The RX 5600M is not a competitor to the RTX A6000; it is a different product category entirely, and the benchmarks reflect that.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 5600M has a higher average benchmark score of 46,601, compared to the NVIDIA RTX A6000’s 44,075, a difference of approximately 5.7%.

Q: What is the largest performance gap in head-to-head tests?

A: The largest gap is in Geekbench Vulkan, where the RTX A6000 scores 164,462 versus the RX 5600M’s 48,843, a delta of -70.3% for the AMD card.

Q: Does the RX 5600M have ray tracing cores?

A: No, the RX 5600M has no ray tracing cores (listed as null), while the RTX A6000 has 84.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The RTX A6000 has a bandwidth of 768.0 GB/s from its 384-bit bus, while the RX 5600M has 288.0 GB/s from a 192-bit bus.

Q: Which GPU has a higher transistor density?

A: The RTX A6000 has a higher transistor density at 45.1M / mm², compared to the RX 5600M’s 41.0M / mm², despite the RX 5600M using a smaller 7 nm process node.

Q: How many shading units does each GPU have?

A: The RTX A6000 has 10,752 shading units, while the RX 5600M has 2,304, a 4.67x difference.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two GPUs is stark, starting with the process node. The RX 5600M uses a 7 nm node fabricated by TSMC, while the RTX A6000 uses an 8 nm node from Samsung. Despite the larger node, the RTX A6000 packs 28,300 million transistors on a 628 mm² die, compared to the RX 5600M’s 10,300 million on 251 mm², resulting in a transistor density of 45.1M / mm² for NVIDIA versus 41.0M / mm² for AMD. The RX 5600M is built on RDNA 1.0 architecture with the Navi 10 chip, while the RTX A6000 uses Ampere with the GA102 chip. The RTX A6000 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), whereas the RX 5600M only reaches DirectX 12 (12_1), a generational feature gap. Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4, but the NVIDIA card’s API set includes ray tracing cores (84) and tensor cores (336), which are entirely absent from the AMD part. The RTX A6000 also offers FP16 at a 1:1 ratio (38.71 TFLOPS), while the RX 5600M achieves FP16 at a 2:1 ratio (11.66 TFLOPS), indicating that the NVIDIA architecture handles half-precision compute without rate-limiting.

Specification Differences

The specification sheets diverge on nearly every metric. The RX 5600M has a base clock of 1035 MHz and boost of 1265 MHz, with a game clock of 1190 MHz, while the RTX A6000 runs at 1410 MHz base and 1800 MHz boost. Memory configurations are radically different: 6 GB GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus for AMD versus 48 GB GDDR6 on a 384-bit bus for NVIDIA, with bandwidths of 288.0 GB/s and 768.0 GB/s, respectively. The RX 5600M has 144 texture mapping units and 64 raster operations pipelines, while the RTX A6000 has 336 TMUs and 112 ROPs. Pixel rates are 80.96 GPixel/s for the RX 5600M and 201.6 GPixel/s for the RTX A6000, with texture rates of 182.2 GTexel/s versus 604.8 GTexel/s. Power consumption is 150 W for the AMD card and 300 W for NVIDIA, with the RTX A6000 requiring an 8-pin EPS connector and a 700 W suggested PSU, while the RX 5600M uses no power connectors and is an IGP. The RTX A6000 is a dual-slot card measuring 267 mm in length and 112 mm in height, with 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, whereas the RX 5600M has portable device-dependent outputs. The release dates are close, July 2020 for AMD and October 2020 for NVIDIA, but the RTX A6000 has a successor (Workstation Ada) and a predecessor (Quadro Turing), while the RX 5600M’s predecessor is Polaris Mobile and has no successor listed.