Radeon RX 7600S vs Pro 5600M
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon Pro 5600M with Radeon RX 7600S, including specs and performance data.
7600S outperforms Pro 5600M by an impressive 68% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 289 | 145 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 34.55 | 38.61 |
| Architecture | RDNA 1 (2019−2020) | RDNA 3.0 (2022−2026) |
| GPU code name | Navi 12 | Navi 33 |
| Market segment | Mobile workstation | Laptop |
| Release date | 15 June 2020 (6 years ago) | 4 January 2023 (3 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 2560 | 1792 |
| Core clock speed | 822 MHz | 1500 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1144 MHz | 2200 MHz |
| Number of transistors | no data | 13,300 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 7 nm | 6 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 50 Watt | 75 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 183.0 | 246.4 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 15.77 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 64 | 64 |
| TMUs | 160 | 112 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 28 |
| L0 Cache | no data | 448 KB |
| L1 Cache | no data | 512 KB |
| L2 Cache | 4 MB | 2 MB |
| L3 Cache | no data | 32 MB |
Form factor & compatibility
Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).
| Laptop size | medium sized | large |
| Interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | None |
VRAM capacity and type
Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.
| Memory type | HBM2 | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 8 GB |
| Memory bus width | 2048 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 770 MHz | 2000 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 394.2 GB/s | 256.0 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
| Resizable BAR | + | + |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
| Display Connectors | Portable Device Dependent | Portable Device Dependent |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 6.0 | 6.7 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | 2.2 |
| Vulkan | 1.3 | 1.3 |
Synthetic benchmarks
Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark score.
Passmark
This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Average FPS across all PC games
Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:
| Full HD | 60−65
−40.6%
| 101 |
| 1440p | 30−35 | 52
+73.3%
|
| 4K | 16−18 | 27
+68.8%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Atomic Heart | 60−65 | 167
+169%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 120−130 | 200−210
+62.5%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 45−50 | 85−90
+77.6%
|
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 50−55 | 107
+102%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Atomic Heart | 60−65 | 126
+103%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 90−95 | 130−140
+42.9%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 120−130 | 191
+49.2%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 45−50 | 103
+110%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 70−75 | 111
+50%
|
| Fortnite | 110−120 | 160−170
+43.9%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 90−95 | 140−150
+59.3%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 85−90 | 140−150
+69.3%
|
| Valorant | 150−160 | 220−230
+42.8%
|
Full HD
High
| Atomic Heart | 60−65 | 72
+16.1%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 90−95 | 130−140
+42.9%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 120−130
+0.8%
|
127 |
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 250−260 | 270−280
+11.2%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 45−50 | 84
+71.4%
|
| Dota 2 | 110−120
+5.3%
|
113 |
| Far Cry 5 | 70−75 | 107
+44.6%
|
| Fortnite | 110−120 | 160−170
+43.9%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 90−95 | 140−150
+59.3%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 80−85 | 126
+51.8%
|
| Metro Exodus | 50−55
+28.2%
|
39 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 85−90 | 140−150
+69.3%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 65−70 | 159
+141%
|
| Valorant | 150−160 | 220−230
+42.8%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 90−95 | 130−140
+42.9%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 45−50 | 70
+42.9%
|
| Dota 2 | 110−120
+8.2%
|
110 |
| Far Cry 5 | 70−75 | 102
+37.8%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 90−95 | 140−150
+59.3%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 85−90 | 140−150
+69.3%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 65−70 | 95
+43.9%
|
| Valorant | 150−160 | 179
+12.6%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 110−120 | 160−170
+43.9%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 45−50 | 64
+33.3%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 160−170 | 260−270
+63%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 40−45 | 75−80
+90.2%
|
| Metro Exodus | 30−33 | 55−60
+83.3%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 170−180 | 170−180
+0.6%
|
| Valorant | 180−190 | 260−270
+39.8%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 60−65 | 95−100
+51.6%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 21−24 | 43
+95.5%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 50−55 | 90−95
+75%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 55−60 | 100−110
+84.5%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 35−40 | 70−75
+97.2%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 50−55 | 100−105
+85.2%
|
4K
High
| Atomic Heart | 18−20 | 30−33
+66.7%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 21−24
+29.4%
|
17 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 40−45 | 80−85
+95.2%
|
| Metro Exodus | 18−20 | 30−35
+78.9%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 30−35 | 60−65
+81.8%
|
| Valorant | 120−130 | 230−240
+86.3%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 35−40 | 60−65
+71.4%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 21−24 | 40−45
+100%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 9−10 | 18
+100%
|
| Dota 2 | 75−80 | 100−110
+43.4%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 24−27 | 50−55
+92.3%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 40−45 | 70−75
+77.5%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 24−27 | 50−55
+108%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 24−27 | 45−50
+104%
|
This is how Pro 5600M and RX 7600S compete in popular games:
- RX 7600S is 68% faster in 1080p
- RX 7600S is 73% faster in 1440p
- RX 7600S is 69% faster in 4K
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Counter-Strike 2, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the Pro 5600M is 29% faster.
- in Atomic Heart, with 1080p resolution and the Low Preset, the RX 7600S is 169% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Pro 5600M performs better in 5 tests (8%)
- RX 7600S performs better in 57 tests (92%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 22.18 | 37.22 |
| Recency | 15 June 2020 | 4 January 2023 |
| Chip lithography | 7 nm | 6 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 50 Watt | 75 Watt |
Pro 5600M has 33% lower power consumption.
RX 7600S, on the other hand, has a 68% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, and a 14% more advanced lithography process.
The Radeon RX 7600S is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon Pro 5600M in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon Pro 5600M is a mobile workstation graphics card while Radeon RX 7600S is a mobile workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
