Radeon PRO W7800 vs Pro 560X

Place in performance ranking	432	11
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	14.19	9.18
Architecture	Polaris (2016−2019)	RDNA 3.0 (2022)
GPU code name	Polaris 21	Navi 31
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Workstation
Release date	5 June 2017 (7 years ago)	13 April 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$2,499
Current price	$133	$3907 (1.6x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

Pro 560X has 55% better value for money than PRO W7800.

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	1024	4480
Core clock speed	907 MHz	no data
Boost clock speed	no data	2499 MHz
Number of transistors	3,000 million	57,700 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	35 Watt	260 Watt
Texture fill rate	64.26	699.7

Form factor & compatibility

Information on Radeon Pro 560X and Radeon PRO W7800 compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Laptop size	large	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x8	PCIe 4.0 x16
Length	no data	280 mm
Width	no data	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	2x 8-pin

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	GDDR5	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	32 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	5080 MHz	18 GB/s
Memory bandwidth	81.28 GB/s	576.0 GB/s
Shared memory	-	no data

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 Connectors

No outputs

3x DisplayPort 2.1, 1x mini-DisplayPort 2.1

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync

no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_0)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	6.4	6.7
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	2.0	2.2
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.3

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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 9.52

PRO W7800 75.27
+691%

PRO W7800 outperforms Pro 560X by 691% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

Pro 560X 3677

PRO W7800 29070
+691%

PRO W7800 outperforms Pro 560X by 691% in Passmark.

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	45 −678%	350−400 +678%
1440p	49 −614%	350−400 +614%
4K	17 −665%	130−140 +665%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

1−2

−1400%

14−16
+1400%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4 −933%	31 +933%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2 −1300%	14−16 +1300%
Battlefield 5	6−7 −717%	49 +717%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 −867%	29 +867%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −1400%	14−16 +1400%
Far Cry 5	3−4 −833%	28 +833%
Far Cry New Dawn	4−5 −850%	38 +850%
Forza Horizon 4	6−7 −783%	53 +783%
Hitman 3	2−3 −800%	18−20 +800%
Horizon Zero Dawn	5−6 −720%	40−45 +720%
Metro Exodus	5−6 −720%	41 +720%
Red Dead Redemption 2	4−5 −800%	36 +800%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	3−4 −867%	27−30 +867%
Watch Dogs: Legion	4−5 −775%	35−40 +775%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4 −733%	25 +733%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2 −1300%	14−16 +1300%
Battlefield 5	5−6 −740%	42 +740%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 −733%	25 +733%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −1400%	14−16 +1400%
Far Cry 5	3−4 −767%	26 +767%
Far Cry New Dawn	3−4 −833%	28 +833%
Forza Horizon 4	5−6 −820%	45−50 +820%
Hitman 3	2−3 −800%	18−20 +800%
Horizon Zero Dawn	5−6 −720%	40−45 +720%
Metro Exodus	4−5 −700%	32 +700%
Red Dead Redemption 2	3−4 −867%	29 +867%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	3−4 −867%	27−30 +867%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	4−5 −750%	34 +750%
Watch Dogs: Legion	4−5 −775%	35−40 +775%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2 −1300%	14 +1300%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2 −1300%	14−16 +1300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 −800%	18 +800%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −1400%	14−16 +1400%
Far Cry 5	2−3 −850%	19 +850%
Forza Horizon 4	4−5 −800%	36 +800%
Horizon Zero Dawn	5−6 −720%	40−45 +720%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	3−4 −867%	27−30 +867%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	2−3 −900%	20 +900%
Watch Dogs: Legion	4−5 −775%	35−40 +775%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

3−4
−733%

+733%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	2−3 −850%	18−20 +850%
Far Cry New Dawn	1−2 −1400%	14−16 +1400%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2 −800%	9−10 +800%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	0−1	5−6
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	1−2 −1000%	10−12 +1000%
Cyberpunk 2077	0−1	4−5
Far Cry 5	1−2 −1400%	14−16 +1400%
Forza Horizon 4	2−3 −750%	16−18 +750%
Hitman 3	1−2 −1200%	12−14 +1200%
Horizon Zero Dawn	2−3 −900%	20−22 +900%
Metro Exodus	1−2 −1300%	14−16 +1300%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	1−2 −1100%	12−14 +1100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	1−2 −800%	9−10 +800%
Watch Dogs: Legion	0−1	5−6

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

2−3
−700%

+700%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2 −800%	9−10 +800%
Far Cry New Dawn	0−1	7−8
Hitman 3	0−1	6−7
Horizon Zero Dawn	1−2 −900%	10−11 +900%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	0−1	6
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	0−1	7−8

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	0−1	5−6
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	0−1	4−5
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	0−1	4−5
Cyberpunk 2077	0−1	1−2
Far Cry 5	0−1	5−6
Forza Horizon 4	1−2 −1100%	12−14 +1100%
Horizon Zero Dawn	1−2 −900%	10−11 +900%
Metro Exodus	1−2 −800%	9 +800%
Watch Dogs: Legion	0−1	3−4

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

1−2

−800%

9−10
+800%

This is how Pro 560X and PRO W7800 compete in popular games:

PRO W7800 is 678% faster in 1080p
PRO W7800 is 614% faster in 1440p
PRO W7800 is 665% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	9.52	75.27
Recency	5 June 2017	13 April 2023
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	32 GB
Chip lithography	14 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	35 Watt	260 Watt