Radeon Pro V340 vs RX 560
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon RX 560 with Radeon Pro V340, including specs and performance data.
RX 560 outperforms Pro V340 by a significant 29% 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 | 534 | 599 |
| Place by popularity | 74 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 1.48 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 9.03 | 2.28 |
| Architecture | GCN 4.0 (2016−2020) | GCN 5.0 (2017−2020) |
| GPU code name | Polaris 21 | Vega 10 |
| Market segment | Desktop | Workstation |
| Release date | 18 April 2017 (8 years ago) | 26 August 2018 (7 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $99 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
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 | 1024 | 3584 |
| Core clock speed | 1175 MHz | 852 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1275 MHz | 1500 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 3,000 million | 12,500 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 75 Watt | 230 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 81.60 | 336.0 |
| Floating-point processing power | 2.611 TFLOPS | 10.75 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 16 | 64 |
| TMUs | 64 | 224 |
| L1 Cache | 256 KB | 896 KB |
| L2 Cache | 1024 KB | 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 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Length | 170 mm | 267 mm |
| Width | 2-slot | 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 | HBM2 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 16 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 2048 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1750 MHz | 945 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 112.0 GB/s | 483.8 GB/s |
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 DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort | No outputs |
| HDMI | + | - |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_0) | 12 (12_1) |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | 6.4 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | 2.0 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | 1.1.125 |
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.
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.
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 | 35
+29.6%
| 27−30
−29.6%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | 2.83 | no data |
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 8.80 | 6.82 |
| Recency | 18 April 2017 | 26 August 2018 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 16 GB |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 75 Watt | 230 Watt |
RX 560 has a 29% higher aggregate performance score, and 206.7% lower power consumption.
Pro V340, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, and a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount.
The Radeon RX 560 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon Pro V340 in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon RX 560 is a desktop graphics card while Radeon Pro V340 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.
