AMD Radeon Pro 560 vs AMD Radeon RX 9060 Comparison

# The Verdict

The AMD Radeon RX 9060 is the decisive winner in every direct comparison available. In the two shared benchmark tests, it outperforms the AMD Radeon Pro 560 by margins that are impossible to overlook: 82.4% higher in Geekbench OpenCL and 58.9% higher in Geekbench Vulkan. The Pro 560 records zero wins in the head-to-head data, while the RX 9060 takes both. For any workload that relies on compute or graphics acceleration, the RX 9060 is the only rational choice from this pairing.

The Pro 560, however, is not without context. It sits at the 61st percentile of all GPUs in the database, slightly above the RX 9060's 59th percentile, and its average benchmark score of 17,551 is actually higher than the RX 9060's 16,014. This counterintuitive result stems from the fact that the two cards were tested across different benchmark suites. The Pro 560's scores come from Geekbench Metal, OpenCL, and Vulkan, while the RX 9060's average includes a broader set of PassMark tests, including legacy DirectX 9 and 10 workloads where modern architectures often score lower. The data does not support a claim that the Pro 560 is faster; it only shows that the two cards are not directly comparable across the full test sets.

Who should pick which? The RX 9060 is for anyone running current DirectX 12, Vulkan, or OpenCL workloads. It delivers 21.43 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus with 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth, and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, Vulkan 1.4, and hardware ray tracing via 28 ray accelerators. The Pro 560 is a legacy part, end-of-life since its 2017 release, built for older macOS-oriented environments where its 1.858 TFLOPS and 4 GB of GDDR5 were once sufficient. New purchases should target the RX 9060 without hesitation.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from entirely different architectural lineages. The Pro 560 uses the Polaris 21 chip based on GCN 4.0, fabricated on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The RX 9060 uses the Navi 44 chip based on RDNA 4.0, fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC. This process shrink is not a minor detail: the RX 9060 packs 29,700 million transistors into a 199 mm² die, achieving a transistor density of 149.2M per mm². The Pro 560, by contrast, contains only 3,000 million transistors on a 123 mm² die, yielding 24.4M per mm². The density gap is roughly sixfold, and it shows in every measurable performance metric.

Core counts tell a similar story. The RX 9060 has 1,792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 64 render output units. The Pro 560 has 1,024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and only 16 ROPs. The RX 9060 also adds 28 ray tracing cores, a feature the Pro 560 lacks entirely. Pixel throughput is 191.4 GPixel/s for the RX 9060 versus 14.51 GPixel/s for the Pro 560, a 13-fold advantage. Texture throughput is 334.9 GTexel/s versus 58.05 GTexel/s, a 5.8-fold advantage. Floating-point performance is even more lopsided: 21.43 TFLOPS versus 1.858 TFLOPS, an 11.5-fold gap. Both cards have a 1:1 FP16 to FP32 ratio, but the absolute FP16 numbers follow the same pattern.

Memory architecture also diverges. The RX 9060 uses 8 GB of GDDR6 at 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective, delivering 288.0 GB/s across a 128-bit bus. The Pro 560 uses 4 GB of GDDR5 at 1270 MHz with 5.1 Gbps effective, delivering 81.28 GB/s on the same 128-bit bus. The RX 9060 has 3.5 times the bandwidth and twice the capacity. The RX 9060 connects via PCIe 5.0 x16, while the Pro 560 uses PCIe 3.0 x8, further widening the gap in data transfer capabilities.

Power and physical design differ as well. The RX 9060 has a TDP of 132 W, requires a single 8-pin power connector, and is a dual-slot card. The Pro 560 has a TDP of 75 W, draws power entirely from the slot (no external connectors), and is an integrated GPU package (IGP) with portable-device-dependent display outputs. The RX 9060 outputs via 1x HDMI 2.1b and 2x DisplayPort 2.1a. The API support reflects the generational leap: RX 9060 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, while the Pro 560 is limited to DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3. Both support OpenGL 4.6.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains two direct comparisons between these cards, and the RX 9060 wins both by wide margins. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 9060 scores 88,183 against the Pro 560's 15,504. That is an 82.4% advantage, meaning the RX 9060 delivers more than five times the OpenCL compute performance. This aligns with the raw FP32 specifications: 21.43 TFLOPS versus 1.858 TFLOPS. For compute-heavy tasks such as rendering, physics simulation, or data processing, the RX 9060 is in a different class entirely.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the RX 9060 scores 39,476 against the Pro 560's 16,232, a 58.9% lead. Vulkan is a lower-level graphics and compute API, and the RX 9060's RDNA 4.0 architecture with 28 ray tracing cores and 64 ROPs gives it a substantial edge in modern graphics workloads. The Pro 560's GCN 4.0 architecture, while capable in its era, cannot keep pace with the newer design's efficiency improvements. The RX 9060's higher pixel rate (191.4 GPixel/s versus 14.51 GPixel/s) and texture rate (334.9 GTexel/s versus 58.05 GTexel/s) directly explain this Vulkan dominance.

Note that the Pro 560 has a Geekbench Metal score of 20,918, but the RX 9060 has no Metal benchmark recorded, so no direct comparison is possible on that API. The Pro 560's Metal score contributes to its higher average benchmark score (17,551 versus 16,014), but this is a measurement artifact, not a performance equivalence. The head-to-head data records two wins for the RX 9060 and zero for the Pro 560, and that is the authoritative tie-breaker.

FAQ

Q: Which card has higher raw compute performance?

A: The RX 9060 delivers 21.43 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the Pro 560 delivers 1.858 TFLOPS. The RX 9060 is 11.5 times faster in this specification, and its Geekbench OpenCL score of 88,183 versus 15,504 confirms the gap in real workloads.

Q: Do these cards support ray tracing?

A: Yes, but only the RX 9060 has dedicated ray tracing hardware: 28 ray accelerator cores. The Pro 560 has no ray tracing cores at all, making the RX 9060 the only option for ray-traced graphics workloads.

Q: How do their memory configurations compare?

A: The RX 9060 has 8 GB of GDDR6 with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the Pro 560 has 4 GB of GDDR5 with 81.28 GB/s bandwidth. Both use a 128-bit bus, but the RX 9060 has twice the capacity and 3.5 times the bandwidth.

Q: Which card is more power-efficient?

A: The Pro 560 has a 75 W TDP versus the RX 9060's 132 W TDP. However, the RX 9060 delivers far more performance per watt given its 11.5-fold FP32 advantage at less than double the power draw. The Pro 560 requires no external power connector, while the RX 9060 needs a single 8-pin connector and a 300 W suggested PSU.

Q: Why does the Pro 560 have a higher percentile rank if the RX 9060 is faster?

A: The Pro 560 sits at the 61st percentile of all GPUs, while the RX 9060 is at the 59th percentile. This is because the two cards were measured with different benchmark suites: the Pro 560's average (17,551) comes from Geekbench tests, while the RX 9060's average (16,014) includes PassMark DirectX 9 and 10 tests that penalize modern architectures. The head-to-head data, where the RX 9060 wins both tests, is the more reliable comparison.

Q: Is the Pro 560 still a viable product?

A: The database marks the Pro 560 as end-of-life. It was released in 2017 and has no successor listed. The RX 9060 is active, released in 2025, and has no successor either, but its modern feature set (DirectX 12 Ultimate, Vulkan 1.4, ray tracing) makes it suitable for current software.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 9060 wins in every workload category represented in the measured data. Its 82.4% OpenCL advantage makes it the clear choice for general-purpose GPU compute, including OpenCL-based rendering, physics, and scientific workloads. Its 58.9% Vulkan advantage covers modern game engines and low-overhead graphics APIs. The 21.43 TFLOPS FP32 rating supports heavy compute tasks, and the 288.0 GB/s bandwidth handles large textures and data sets without bottlenecking. The 8 GB memory capacity allows larger working sets than the Pro 560's 4 GB. The RX 9060 also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, which enables features like ray tracing and variable rate shading in games that use them. For any new build or upgrade targeting current software, the RX 9060 is the only sensible pick.

The Pro 560's wins are narrower and more situational. Its 61st percentile rank, while higher than the RX 9060's 59th, is driven by its Geekbench Metal score of 20,918, which is its best result. In macOS environments where Metal is the primary API and where the card's IGP form factor (portable-device-dependent outputs) is acceptable, the Pro 560 can still execute legacy workloads. Its 75 W TDP and lack of external power connectors make it suitable for compact systems with limited power delivery. However, these are niche advantages: the Pro 560 is end-of-life, and its 14 nm process, GCN 4.0 architecture, and 4 GB GDDR5 memory limit it to older software. The database records zero benchmark wins for the Pro 560 against the RX 9060.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon Pro 560 | AMD Radeon RX 9060 |

|---|---|---|

| Architecture | GCN 4.0 | RDNA 4.0 |

| Process Node | 14 nm (GlobalFoundries) | 4 nm (TSMC) |

| Transistors | 3,000 million | 29,700 million |

| Die Size | 123 mm² | 199 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 24.4M / mm² | 149.2M / mm² |

| Base Clock | Not specified | 1700 MHz |

| Boost Clock | Not specified | 2990 MHz |

| Game Clock | Not specified | 2400 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1270 MHz, 5.1 Gbps effective | 2250 MHz, 18 Gbps effective |

| Memory Size | 4 GB | 8 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus | 128 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 81.28 GB/s | 288.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 1024 | 1792 |

| TMUs | 64 | 112 |

| ROPs | 16 | 64 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | None | 28 |

| Pixel Rate | 14.51 GPixel/s | 191.4 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 58.05 GTexel/s | 334.9 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 1.858 TFLOPS | 21.43 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 1.858 TFLOPS (1:1) | 21.43 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 75 W | 132 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | 1x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | Not specified | 300 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 5.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 1x HDMI 2.1b, 2x DisplayPort 2.1a |

| DirectX Support | 12 (12_0) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |

| OpenGL Support | 4.6 | 4.6 |

| Vulkan Support | 1.3 | 1.4 |

| Production Status | End-of-life | Active |

| Release Date | 2017-04-17 | 2025-08-04 |