AMD Radeon Pro 560 vs AMD Radeon RX 560X Comparison

The AMD Radeon RX 560X and AMD Radeon Pro 560 are both built on the same Polaris 21 silicon, but they target different worlds: one is a discrete desktop card, the other an integrated mobile part for Apple laptops. The benchmark data shows a clear performance hierarchy, with the RX 560X leading in raw compute tests, while the Pro 560 counters with a strong showing in Apple’s Metal API. Both cards share the same GCN 4.0 architecture, 1024 shading units, and 4 GB of GDDR5 memory, yet their clock speeds and memory configurations create distinct performance profiles.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in OpenCL compute workloads?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 560X wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 17020, which is 9.8% higher than the AMD Radeon Pro 560’s 15504. This advantage comes from the RX 560X’s higher core and memory clocks.

Q: How large is the gap in Vulkan performance?

A: The RX 560X posts a Geekbench Vulkan score of 20231, defeating the Pro 560’s 16232 by a substantial 24.6%. This is the largest performance delta between the two cards in any shared test.

Q: Does the Radeon Pro 560 have any unique benchmark advantage?

A: Yes. The Pro 560 has a Geekbench Metal score of 20918, a test that the RX 560X did not run. This indicates strong performance in Apple’s graphics API, which is relevant for its intended Mac environment.

Q: What are the memory bandwidth differences?

A: The RX 560X has a memory bandwidth of 112.0 GB/s, compared to 81.28 GB/s for the Pro 560. The RX 560X’s memory runs at 1750 MHz (7 Gbps effective), while the Pro 560’s memory is clocked at 1270 MHz (5.1 Gbps effective).

Q: How do their overall average benchmark scores compare?

A: The RX 560X has an average benchmark score of 18626, placing it in the 62nd percentile of all GPUs. The Pro 560 averages 17551, sitting in the 61st percentile. The RX 560X is 6.1% ahead on average.

Q: Are these cards still in production?

A: No. Both the AMD Radeon RX 560X and the AMD Radeon Pro 560 are marked as end-of-life products. The RX 560X was released in April 2018, while the Pro 560 came out a year earlier in April 2017.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon RX 560X is the clear winner for general compute performance and cross-platform APIs. Its 9.8% lead in OpenCL and 24.6% lead in Vulkan show that it handles both legacy and modern compute workloads with significantly more headroom. The RX 560X’s higher clock speeds—1175 MHz base and 1275 MHz boost—translate directly into more throughput, making it the better choice for users who need raw GPU compute outside of Apple’s ecosystem. Its 112.0 GB/s memory bandwidth also gives it an edge in memory-intensive tasks.

The AMD Radeon Pro 560, despite losing both head-to-head tests, has one distinct advantage: its Geekbench Metal score of 20918. This is a workload where the RX 560X has no data, and it reflects the Pro 560’s design purpose as a mobile GPU for MacBook Pro systems. In macOS environments that leverage Metal, the Pro 560 is likely to perform very well, especially given that its Metal score exceeds its own OpenCL and Vulkan results by a wide margin. For users locked into Apple’s ecosystem, the Pro 560 is the only one of these two that fits, and its Metal performance suggests it is well-optimized for that role.

Another area where the Pro 560 wins is physical form factor. It is listed as an IGP (integrated graphics processor), meaning it is soldered onto the motherboard of a laptop. The RX 560X, in contrast, is a dual-slot discrete card measuring 170 mm (6.7 inches) in length, requiring a PCIe slot and a 250 W suggested power supply. For mobile users, the Pro 560 is the only viable option, despite its lower raw compute scores.

Architecture Differences

Both cards are built on the same Polaris 21 chip using GCN 4.0 architecture, manufactured on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. They share identical transistor counts of 3,000 million and a die size of 123 mm², resulting in the same transistor density of 24.4M / mm². The core configuration is also identical: 1024 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 16 raster output units. Neither card has dedicated ray tracing or tensor cores.

The key architectural difference lies in clock speeds and memory configuration. The RX 560X has defined base and boost clocks of 1175 MHz and 1275 MHz, respectively, while the Pro 560’s core clocks are not specified in the data. This clock advantage drives the RX 560X’s higher pixel rate (20.40 GPixel/s vs 14.51 GPixel/s) and texture rate (81.60 GTexel/s vs 58.05 GTexel/s). The FP32 compute performance follows the same pattern: 2.611 TFLOPS for the RX 560X versus 1.858 TFLOPS for the Pro 560, with both maintaining a 1:1 ratio for FP16.

Memory architecture is another differentiator. Both use 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, but the RX 560X’s memory is clocked at 1750 MHz (7 Gbps effective), delivering 112.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Pro 560’s memory runs at 1270 MHz (5.1 Gbps effective), yielding only 81.28 GB/s. This 37.7% bandwidth advantage for the RX 560X is significant for texture-heavy and large-data workloads.

The physical implementation differs substantially. The RX 560X is a dual-slot card with a 170 mm length, requiring no external power connectors and a 250 W suggested PSU. It offers 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0b, and 1x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. The Pro 560 is an IGP with no dimensions listed, no power connectors, and display outputs that are portable device dependent. Both use a PCIe 3.0 x8 bus interface.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ most notably in clock speeds, memory bandwidth, and physical design. The RX 560X has a base clock of 1175 MHz and a boost clock of 1275 MHz, whereas the Pro 560’s base and boost clocks are not listed. This leads to higher fill rates for the RX 560X: 20.40 GPixel/s pixel rate and 81.60 GTexel/s texture rate, versus 14.51 GPixel/s and 58.05 GTexel/s for the Pro 560. FP32 compute is 2.611 TFLOPS for the RX 560X and 1.858 TFLOPS for the Pro 560.

Memory clock is a clear separator: 1750 MHz (7 Gbps effective) for the RX 560X versus 1270 MHz (5.1 Gbps effective) for the Pro 560. This results in a bandwidth difference of 112.0 GB/s versus 81.28 GB/s, a 37.7% advantage for the RX 560X. Both cards have 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus.

Power and form factor differ significantly. The RX 560X is a dual-slot card with a 250 W suggested PSU, while the Pro 560 is an IGP with no suggested PSU listed. The RX 560X has defined dimensions of 170 mm (6.7 inches) in length; the Pro 560 has none. Display outputs are 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0b, and 1x DisplayPort 1.4a for the RX 560X, versus portable device dependent for the Pro 560. The RX 560X has a release date of April 2018, while the Pro 560 came out in April 2017.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The data shows a decisive win for the AMD Radeon RX 560X in both shared benchmark tests. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 560X scores 17020 against the Pro 560’s 15504, a 9.8% lead. This margin reflects the RX 560X’s higher core clocks and memory bandwidth, which directly benefit OpenCL’s compute-heavy workloads. The RX 560X’s 2.611 TFLOPS of FP32 performance versus 1.858 TFLOPS for the Pro 560 gives it a theoretical 40.5% compute advantage, though the real-world benchmark gap is smaller, indicating other bottlenecks such as memory latency or driver overhead.

The Vulkan test reveals an even larger gap. The RX 560X achieves 20231, while the Pro 560 manages only 16232, a 24.6% difference. This is nearly triple the OpenCL margin, suggesting that the Pro 560’s lower memory bandwidth (81.28 GB/s vs 112.0 GB/s) becomes a more severe limiting factor in Vulkan’s draw-call-heavy and buffer-intensive workloads. The RX 560X’s boost clock of 1275 MHz likely helps sustain higher performance under Vulkan’s parallel execution model.

Interestingly, the Pro 560’s strongest result comes in a test where the RX 560X has no entry: Geekbench Metal. The Pro 560 scores 20918 in Metal, which is 34.9% higher than its own OpenCL score and 28.9% higher than its Vulkan score. This suggests that the Pro 560’s drivers are highly optimized for Apple’s Metal API, making it a strong performer in macOS-native applications despite its lower raw specs.

Looking at the broader competitive landscape, the RX 560X’s average score of 18626 places it just 0.3% behind the AMD Radeon Pro 5700 XT (18685) and 0.5% ahead of the AMD FirePro D500 (18533). The Pro 560’s average of 17551 is nearly identical to the AMD Radeon 780M (17588, -0.2%) and the AMD Radeon Pro 460 (17509, +0.2%). These rankings show that while the RX 560X competes with higher-tier workstation and gaming GPUs, the Pro 560 sits in a lower performance tier, closer to integrated graphics solutions.