Arc Pro B60 vs Radeon RX Vega 56
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon RX Vega 56 with Arc Pro B60, including specs and performance data.
RX Vega 56 outperforms Pro B60 by a small 5% 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 | 197 | 217 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 17.24 | 30.42 |
| Power efficiency | 11.35 | 11.38 |
| Architecture | GCN 5.0 (2017−2020) | Xe2 (2024) |
| GPU code name | Vega 10 | BMG-G21 |
| Market segment | Desktop | Workstation |
| Release date | 14 August 2017 (8 years ago) | 5 September 2025 (less than a year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $399 | $499 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
Arc Pro B60 has 76% better value for money than RX Vega 56.
Performance to price scatter graph
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 cores | 3584 | 2560 |
| Core clock speed | 1156 MHz | 2000 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1471 MHz | 2400 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 12,500 million | 19,600 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 210 Watt | 200 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 329.5 | 384.0 |
| Floating-point processing power | 10.54 TFLOPS | 12.29 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 64 | 16 |
| TMUs | 224 | 160 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 20 |
| L1 Cache | 896 KB | no data |
| L2 Cache | 4 MB | 4 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).
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 5.0 x8 |
| Length | 267 mm | 167 mm |
| Width | 2-slot | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | 2x 8-pin | 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 | 24 GB |
| Memory bus width | 2048 Bit | 192 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 800 MHz | 2375 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 409.6 GB/s | 456.0 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 | 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort | 4x mini-DisplayPort 2.1 |
| HDMI | + | - |
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 | 6.4 | 6.6 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | 1.1.125 | 1.4 |
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 | 115
+15%
| 100−110
−15%
|
| 1440p | 77
+10%
| 70−75
−10%
|
| 4K | 50
+11.1%
| 45−50
−11.1%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | 3.47
+43.8%
| 4.99
−43.8%
|
| 1440p | 5.18
+37.6%
| 7.13
−37.6%
|
| 4K | 7.98
+39%
| 11.09
−39%
|
- RX Vega 56 has 44% lower cost per frame in 1080p
- RX Vega 56 has 38% lower cost per frame in 1440p
- RX Vega 56 has 39% lower cost per frame in 4K
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 170−180
+11.3%
|
160−170
−11.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 70−75
+9.2%
|
65−70
−9.2%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 70−75
+7.7%
|
65−70
−7.7%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 151
+7.9%
|
140−150
−7.9%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 170−180
+11.3%
|
160−170
−11.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 70−75
+9.2%
|
65−70
−9.2%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 98
+8.9%
|
90−95
−8.9%
|
| Fortnite | 150
+7.1%
|
140−150
−7.1%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 141
+8.5%
|
130−140
−8.5%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 100−105
+5.3%
|
95−100
−5.3%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 70−75
+7.7%
|
65−70
−7.7%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 153
+9.3%
|
140−150
−9.3%
|
| Valorant | 190−200
+9.4%
|
180−190
−9.4%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 140
+7.7%
|
130−140
−7.7%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 170−180
+11.3%
|
160−170
−11.3%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 270−280
+6.2%
|
260−270
−6.2%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 70−75
+9.2%
|
65−70
−9.2%
|
| Dota 2 | 130−140
+13.3%
|
120−130
−13.3%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 93
+9.4%
|
85−90
−9.4%
|
| Fortnite | 139
+6.9%
|
130−140
−6.9%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 134
+11.7%
|
120−130
−11.7%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 100−105
+5.3%
|
95−100
−5.3%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 94
+10.6%
|
85−90
−10.6%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 70−75
+7.7%
|
65−70
−7.7%
|
| Metro Exodus | 70
+7.7%
|
65−70
−7.7%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 137
+5.4%
|
130−140
−5.4%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 124
+12.7%
|
110−120
−12.7%
|
| Valorant | 190−200
+9.4%
|
180−190
−9.4%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 131
+9.2%
|
120−130
−9.2%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 70−75
+9.2%
|
65−70
−9.2%
|
| Dota 2 | 130−140
+13.3%
|
120−130
−13.3%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 89
+11.3%
|
80−85
−11.3%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 109
+9%
|
100−105
−9%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 70−75
+7.7%
|
65−70
−7.7%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 120
+9.1%
|
110−120
−9.1%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 74
+5.7%
|
70−75
−5.7%
|
| Valorant | 190−200
+9.4%
|
180−190
−9.4%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 108
+8%
|
100−105
−8%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 70−75
+5.7%
|
70−75
−5.7%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 220−230
+5.2%
|
210−220
−5.2%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 60−65
+12.7%
|
55−60
−12.7%
|
| Metro Exodus | 42
+5%
|
40−45
−5%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 170−180
+9.4%
|
160−170
−9.4%
|
| Valorant | 230−240
+5.9%
|
220−230
−5.9%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 99
+10%
|
90−95
−10%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 30−35
+13.3%
|
30−33
−13.3%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 74
+5.7%
|
70−75
−5.7%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 88
+10%
|
80−85
−10%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 35−40
+20%
|
30−33
−20%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 55−60
+12%
|
50−55
−12%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 74
+5.7%
|
70−75
−5.7%
|
4K
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 30−35
+13.3%
|
30−33
−13.3%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 50
+11.1%
|
45−50
−11.1%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 20−22
+11.1%
|
18−20
−11.1%
|
| Metro Exodus | 27
+12.5%
|
24−27
−12.5%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 44
+10%
|
40−45
−10%
|
| Valorant | 190−200
+6.1%
|
180−190
−6.1%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 55
+10%
|
50−55
−10%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 30−35
+13.3%
|
30−33
−13.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 14−16
+7.1%
|
14−16
−7.1%
|
| Dota 2 | 95−100
+6.7%
|
90−95
−6.7%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 39
+11.4%
|
35−40
−11.4%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 59
+7.3%
|
55−60
−7.3%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 20−22
+11.1%
|
18−20
−11.1%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 44
+10%
|
40−45
−10%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 37
+5.7%
|
35−40
−5.7%
|
This is how RX Vega 56 and Arc Pro B60 compete in popular games:
- RX Vega 56 is 15% faster in 1080p
- RX Vega 56 is 10% faster in 1440p
- RX Vega 56 is 11% faster in 4K
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 29.50 | 28.17 |
| Recency | 14 August 2017 | 5 September 2025 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 24 GB |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 210 Watt | 200 Watt |
RX Vega 56 has a 4.7% higher aggregate performance score.
Arc Pro B60, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 8 years, a 200% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 180% more advanced lithography process, and 5% lower power consumption.
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Radeon RX Vega 56 and Arc Pro B60.
Be aware that Radeon RX Vega 56 is a desktop graphics card while Arc Pro B60 is a workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
