RTX 2000 Ada Generation vs Radeon Pro 560X

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon Pro 560X with RTX 2000 Ada Generation, including specs and performance data.

Pro 560X
2018
4 GB GDDR5, 75 Watt
9.54

RTX 2000 Ada Generation outperforms Pro 560X by a whopping 386% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking46473
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data82.47
Power efficiency8.7245.43
ArchitectureGCN 4.0 (2016−2020)Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code namePolaris 21AD107
Market segmentMobile workstationWorkstation
Release date16 July 2018 (6 years ago)12 February 2024 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$649

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores10242816
Core clock speed1004 MHz1620 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2130 MHz
Number of transistors3,000 million18,900 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt70 Watt
Texture fill rate64.26187.4
Floating-point processing power2.056 TFLOPS12 TFLOPS
ROPs1648
TMUs6488
Tensor Coresno data88
Ray Tracing Coresno data22

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 sizelargeno data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x8PCIe 4.0 x8
Lengthno data168 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount4 GB16 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1270 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth81.28 GB/s256.0 GB/s
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display ConnectorsNo outputs4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

FreeSync+-

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12 (12_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.46.8
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.03.0
Vulkan1.2.1311.3
CUDA-8.9

Synthetic benchmark performance

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

Pro 560X 9.54
RTX 2000 Ada Generation 46.37
+386%

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.

Pro 560X 3677
RTX 2000 Ada Generation 17875
+386%

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

Pro 560X 17559
RTX 2000 Ada Generation 86474
+392%

GeekBench 5 Vulkan

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses Vulkan API by AMD & Khronos Group.

Pro 560X 17037
RTX 2000 Ada Generation 82598
+385%

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 HD41
−363%
190−200
+363%
1440p39
−362%
180−190
+362%
4K12
−358%
55−60
+358%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data3.42
1440pno data3.61
4Kno data11.80

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
−367%
70−75
+367%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 31
−384%
150−160
+384%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 14−16
−364%
65−70
+364%
Battlefield 5 49
−369%
230−240
+369%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 29
−383%
140−150
+383%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
−367%
70−75
+367%
Far Cry 5 28
−364%
130−140
+364%
Far Cry New Dawn 38
−374%
180−190
+374%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
−369%
300−310
+369%
Hitman 3 18−20
−372%
85−90
+372%
Horizon Zero Dawn 50−55
−372%
250−260
+372%
Metro Exodus 41
−363%
190−200
+363%
Red Dead Redemption 2 36
−372%
170−180
+372%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 57
−374%
270−280
+374%
Watch Dogs: Legion 60−65
−384%
300−310
+384%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 50
−380%
240−250
+380%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 14−16
−364%
65−70
+364%
Battlefield 5 42
−376%
200−210
+376%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 25
−380%
120−130
+380%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
−367%
70−75
+367%
Far Cry 5 26
−362%
120−130
+362%
Far Cry New Dawn 28
−364%
130−140
+364%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
−369%
300−310
+369%
Hitman 3 18−20
−372%
85−90
+372%
Horizon Zero Dawn 50−55
−372%
250−260
+372%
Metro Exodus 33
−385%
160−170
+385%
Red Dead Redemption 2 29
−383%
140−150
+383%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 30−35
−384%
150−160
+384%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
−362%
120−130
+362%
Watch Dogs: Legion 60−65
−384%
300−310
+384%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14
−364%
65−70
+364%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 14−16
−364%
65−70
+364%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18
−372%
85−90
+372%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
−367%
70−75
+367%
Far Cry 5 19
−374%
90−95
+374%
Forza Horizon 4 36
−372%
170−180
+372%
Hitman 3 18−20
−372%
85−90
+372%
Horizon Zero Dawn 50−55
−372%
250−260
+372%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 30−35
−384%
150−160
+384%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 20
−375%
95−100
+375%
Watch Dogs: Legion 60−65
−384%
300−310
+384%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 25
−380%
120−130
+380%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 18−20
−374%
90−95
+374%
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16
−367%
70−75
+367%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
−344%
40−45
+344%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
−380%
24−27
+380%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
−350%
45−50
+350%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−350%
18−20
+350%
Far Cry 5 10−12
−355%
50−55
+355%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
−363%
190−200
+363%
Hitman 3 12−14
−362%
60−65
+362%
Horizon Zero Dawn 20−22
−375%
95−100
+375%
Metro Exodus 14−16
−364%
65−70
+364%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
−358%
55−60
+358%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
−344%
40−45
+344%
Watch Dogs: Legion 60−65
−383%
290−300
+383%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 16
−369%
75−80
+369%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 9−10
−344%
40−45
+344%
Far Cry New Dawn 7−8
−329%
30−33
+329%
Hitman 3 6−7
−350%
27−30
+350%
Horizon Zero Dawn 40−45
−375%
190−200
+375%
Metro Exodus 7−8
−329%
30−33
+329%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
−329%
30−33
+329%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
−380%
24−27
+380%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5
−350%
18−20
+350%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−350%
18−20
+350%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−300%
4−5
+300%
Far Cry 5 5−6
−380%
24−27
+380%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
−358%
55−60
+358%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−350%
27−30
+350%
Watch Dogs: Legion 3−4
−367%
14−16
+367%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
−344%
40−45
+344%

This is how Pro 560X and RTX 2000 Ada Generation compete in popular games:

  • RTX 2000 Ada Generation is 363% faster in 1080p
  • RTX 2000 Ada Generation is 362% faster in 1440p
  • RTX 2000 Ada Generation is 358% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 9.54 46.37
Recency 16 July 2018 12 February 2024
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 16 GB
Chip lithography 14 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 70 Watt

RTX 2000 Ada Generation has a 386.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 180% more advanced lithography process, and 7.1% lower power consumption.

The RTX 2000 Ada Generation is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon Pro 560X in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon Pro 560X is a mobile workstation card while RTX 2000 Ada Generation is a workstation one.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


AMD Radeon Pro 560X
Radeon Pro 560X
NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation
RTX 2000 Ada Generation

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.6 185 votes

Rate Radeon Pro 560X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 27 votes

Rate RTX 2000 Ada Generation on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.